agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to assembl

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in close reporting pack agent by acting on the exact problem first: save each finished pack section under its section name, have the assembly step check section names already saved before rebuilding, and reuse the saved trial balance section instead of regenerating it on every pass. Do not rerun the whole close unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one account or period first, then rerun the full scope and reconcile the results.

agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to assemble the close reporting pack error failure

Use this when

• The operation in close reporting pack agent fails with this exact problem: agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to assemble the close reporting pack error failure.
• The same failure repeats on retry with unchanged inputs.
• A close task, reconciliation, journal or reporting step is blocked until this is resolved.

Not for this skill when

• The notice is a platform outage from the vendor. Resolve that first, then return here if this problem remains.
• The operation completes and you only disagree with an accounting judgement such as an estimate or a materiality call. That is a controller decision, not this failure.

Steps

1. Reproduce the failure on one named account or period in close reporting pack agent and record the full problem text plus the account, period or journal involved. Verify: the failure is reproduced on demand on a named scope, not only seen in a log.
2. Apply the specific fix for this problem: save each finished pack section under its section name, have the assembly step check section names already saved before rebuilding, and reuse the saved trial balance section instead of regenerating it on every pass. Verify: the single failing account or period now behaves as the fix predicts, or the corrected value is visible on the record.
3. Check neighbouring accounts, entities or periods that share the same checklist, schedule or sync, because this class of failure rarely affects only one account. Verify: the neighbouring items are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Rerun the original operation in close reporting pack agent on the previously failing scope, watching for the same problem rather than assuming success from a quiet log. Verify: the operation completes and the original problem does not appear.
5. Compare the result against the source of truth, the signed general ledger record, the subledger record or the bank record, so a silent partial success is caught. Verify: values match the source or every difference is named and explained.
6. Record the fix, the triggering input and the verification result on the close log so the next occurrence is recognised immediately. Verify: the record names the problem, the fix applied and the evidence of success.

Variant phrasings

agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to assemble the close reporting pack error failure

The verbatim form searchers paste from the console, report or run log. Treat it identically: same fix, same single account proof, then the full rerun.

How to fix - agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to assemble the close reporting pack error failure

The how to phrasing for the same failure in close reporting pack agent. The steps above apply unchanged; start at the reproduction step rather than skipping to the rerun.

close reporting pack agent troubleshooting for this failure

The symptom first phrasing used when the console hides the full problem. Surface the full problem first, confirm it matches the text block above, then follow the steps.

Why it happens

The agent rebuilds a section because the pack index it checks is not updated when the section is written, so the same section looks missing on every pass.

Edge cases

• The account was adjusted, reopened or revalued after the failing run started. Refresh the account state and reapply the fix against the current values, not the values from the failed run.
• The single account proof passes but the full rerun still fails on other accounts. Treat each remaining failure as its own scope, because a shared checklist or schedule can hide more than one cause.
• The source systems disagree on the correct value. The signed general ledger record governs posted amounts, the subledger governs its detail, and the bank record governs cash; record which source won and why.

Compatibility: close reporting pack agent at current versions, plus the general ledger, subledger or close tool the query names; no extra tooling beyond access to the source records needed to verify results.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_UISMg-oE5gxOYFBjwzWKRA

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_UISMg-oE5gxOYFBjwzWKRA

Thread query: agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to assemble the close reporting pack error failure

TL;DR: Fix this in close reporting pack agent by acting on the exact problem first: save each finished pack section under its section name, have the assembly step check section names already saved before rebuilding, and reuse the saved trial balance section instead of regenerating it on every pass. Do not rerun the whole close unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one account or period first, then rerun the full scope and reconcile the results.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Stop the loop by making repetition visible and expensive. Log a hash of the step inputs and the tool result, abort when the same call repeats with the same result beyond a small budget, and require the agent to read back the Metabase state before attempting the step again. Loops during pull Metabase query results almost always mean a success signal the agent cannot see, so it retries a step that already worked or can never work.

agent loop detected: agent kept repeating the same pull Metabase query results step and failed with error

Use this when

• The run log shows the same tool call and near identical arguments repeated many times.
• The Metabase content shows repeated partial attempts or many duplicate objects from one run.
• The run ends by budget exhaustion rather than by a step error.

Not for this skill when

• The agent is slow but each step differs and progress is visible. That is a performance problem, not a loop.
• The agent failed once on a clear API error and stopped. Handle that error directly.

Steps

1. Freeze the run and extract its tool call sequence, counting repeats of the pull Metabase query results step and comparing their arguments. Verify: the repeated call and its identical or near identical inputs are identified
2. Inspect the Metabase state the step was trying to change and compare it with what the agent believed, using the API to read the current card and dashboard definitions plus the query result payloads. Verify: you can state whether the step had already succeeded, was failing permanently, or was aimed at the wrong target
3. Fix the root mismatch, such as pointing verification at the object the build actually creates, or teaching the step to treat an already exists result as success. Verify: a single manual pass of the step now reports success correctly
4. Add a repetition guard to the agent, hashing each tool call with its result and stopping the run after a small number of identical repeats with a clear loop error. Verify: a test run with a forced failure stops at the guard instead of exhausting its budget
5. Add a per step attempt budget and a run level step budget sized for the dashboard build, with the budget breach reported as its own failure type. Verify: the run summary separates loop aborts from ordinary step failures
6. Rerun the full pull Metabase query results task and confirm the agent completes in a normal step count. Verify: the run finishes and the dashboard opens in Metabase

Why it happens

Loops are a state recognition failure. The agent acts, the world changes or refuses to change, and the agent cannot tell the difference from its observations, so its planner rationally chooses the same action again. Retries feel safe to a planner because they are reversible, which is exactly why an external guard has to count them. Progress detection, where each step must change an observable state marker, is the general fix across agent frameworks.

Dashboard building agents plan, call the Metabase API, observe the result, and plan again. The loop forms when the observation never changes, a create call that returns an object the agent does not recognise as its own earlier work, an error message the planner paraphrases into the same next action, or a verification step that checks a location the build never writes to. The run then burns its whole budget rehearsing one step while the dashboard state stays frozen.

Operational notes for loop failures in agent pipelines. Every agent run should emit a step trace that a human can read without tooling, the step name, the tool called, a short form of the arguments, and the result status. Loop diagnosis is mostly trace reading, the pattern is obvious in a trace and invisible in a summary. Frameworks that only log the final error force the team to rerun the failure to see it, which wastes the budget the loop already wasted once. Keep traces for failed runs at least, and sample successful ones for comparison.

Variants and edge cases

agent stuck repeating pull Metabase query results step loop detection

The detection phrasing for runaway repetition in the logs.

agent loop same tool call no progress abort budget

The guard design variant focused on budgets and hashing.

agent retries step that already succeeded Metabase state check

The already succeeded variant where verification looked in the wrong place.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_9x45jJjcTHrkrFQmjicZlQ

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_9x45jJjcTHrkrFQmjicZlQ

Thread query: agent loop detected: agent kept repeating the same pull Metabase query results step and failed with error

TL;DR: Stop the loop by making repetition visible and expensive. Log a hash of the step inputs and the tool result, abort when the same call repeats with the same result beyond a small budget, and require the agent to read back the Metabase state before attempting the step again. Loops during pull Metabase query results almost always mean a success signal the agent cannot see, so it retries a step that already worked or can never work.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in the clause agent workflow by acting on the exact problem first: break the loop by capping retries on the step that tries to update the clause library after a policy change at three attempts, log the state after each attempt, change one input on the next attempt such as the search phrasing, and confirm the step either succeeds or stops with a clear reason. Do not rerun the same workflow unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one workflow run first, then rerun the full scope and reconcile the results.

agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to update the clause library after a policy change error failure

Use this when

• The agent workflow fails with this exact problem: agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to update the clause library after a policy change error failure.
• The same failure repeats on retry with unchanged inputs.
• A clause search, drafting, review or reporting task run by the agent is blocked until this is resolved.

Not for this skill when

• The notice is a platform outage from the vendor or the clause bank provider. Resolve that first, then return here if this problem remains.
• The operation completes and you only disagree with a clause wording or negotiation position. That is a legal owner decision, not this failure.

Steps

1. Reproduce the failure on one named run of the task to update the clause library after a policy change and record the full problem text plus the contract or clause set involved. Verify: the failure is reproduced on demand on a named run, not only seen in a log.
2. Apply the specific fix for this problem: break the loop by capping retries on the step that tries to update the clause library after a policy change at three attempts, log the state after each attempt, change one input on the next attempt such as the search phrasing, and confirm the step either succeeds or stops with a clear reason. Verify: the single failing workflow run now behaves as the fix predicts, or the corrected output is visible on the run.
3. Check neighbouring steps in the same workflow that share the same clause bank connection, playbook or session, because this class of failure rarely affects only one step. Verify: the neighbouring steps are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Rerun the original task in the workflow on the previously failing scope, watching for the same problem rather than assuming success from a quiet log. Verify: the task completes and the original problem does not appear.
5. Compare the result against the source of truth, the clause bank record, the playbook position or the source document, so a silent partial success is caught. Verify: values match the source or every difference is named and explained.
6. Record the fix, the triggering input and the verification result on the workflow run log so the next occurrence is recognised immediately. Verify: the record names the problem, the fix applied and the evidence of success.

Variant phrasings

agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to update the clause library after a policy change error failure

The verbatim form searchers paste from the console, report or run log. Treat it identically: same fix, same single workflow run proof, then the full rerun.

How to fix - agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to update the clause library after a policy change error failure

The how to phrasing for the same failure in the clause agent workflow. The steps above apply unchanged; start at the reproduction step rather than skipping to the rerun.

The clause agent workflow troubleshooting for this failure

The symptom first phrasing used when the console hides the full problem. Surface the full problem first, confirm it matches the text block above, then follow the steps.

Why it happens

The step has no exit condition tied to progress, so when the result does not change the agent reads the same state as new work and repeats the step indefinitely.

Edge cases

• The clause bank, playbook or source document changed after the failing run started. Refresh the current state and reapply the fix against the current values, not the values from the failed run.
• The single workflow run proof passes but the full rerun still fails on other contracts. Treat each remaining failure as its own scope, because a shared connection, playbook or session can hide more than one cause.
• The source systems disagree on the correct value. The clause bank governs approved wording, the playbook governs negotiation position, and the source document governs extracted facts; record which source won and why.

Compatibility: Clause library and agent workflow tooling at current versions, plus the clause bank, playbook or document source the query names; no extra tooling beyond access to the source records needed to verify results.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_OAZxxGwiZRjMoreiHunWlQ

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_OAZxxGwiZRjMoreiHunWlQ

Thread query: agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to update the clause library after a policy change error failure

TL;DR: Fix this in the clause agent workflow by acting on the exact problem first: break the loop by capping retries on the step that tries to update the clause library after a policy change at three attempts, log the state after each attempt, change one input on the next attempt such as the search phrasing, and confirm the step either succeeds or stops with a clear reason. Do not rerun the same workflow unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one workflow run first, then rerun the full scope and reconcile the results.