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

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in mailbox archive agent by acting on the exact problem first: record each mailbox already archived in a run file keyed by user, check that file before archiving again, stop after the same user appears twice, and report mailboxes still open instead of retrying archived ones in a loop. Do not rerun the whole offboarding workflow unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one departing employee first, then rerun the full scope and verify access, assets and records.

agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to archive the departing employee mailbox after handover error failure

Use this when

• The operation in mailbox archive agent fails with this exact problem: agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to archive the departing employee mailbox after handover error failure.
• The same failure repeats on retry with unchanged inputs.
• An exit checklist, access revocation, handover or equipment return 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 employment decision such as the termination date set by HR or the severance terms. That is an HR and legal decision, not this failure.

Steps

1. Reproduce the failure on one named departing employee in mailbox archive agent and record the full problem text plus the employee, last day or checklist involved. Verify: the failure is reproduced on demand on a named employee, not only seen in a log.
2. Apply the specific fix for this problem: record each mailbox already archived in a run file keyed by user, check that file before archiving again, stop after the same user appears twice, and report mailboxes still open instead of retrying archived ones in a loop. Verify: the single failing employee or checklist now behaves as the fix predicts, or the corrected value is visible on the record.
3. Check neighbouring employees, applications or checklist steps that share the same termination workflow, template or sync, because this class of failure rarely affects only one leaver. Verify: the neighbouring items are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Rerun the original operation in mailbox archive 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 HR record for last day and status, the identity provider for account access, the payroll record for final pay or the asset inventory for equipment. 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 offboarding checklist audit 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 archive the departing employee mailbox after handover error failure

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

How to fix - agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to archive the departing employee mailbox after handover error failure

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

mailbox archive 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 loops because it reads archive state from a mailbox list that updates after its check, so an archived mailbox looks open forever until the result is recorded where its own check looks.

Edge cases

• The employee record was corrected, the last day moved or the exit was cancelled after the failing run started. Refresh the record state and reapply the fix against the current values, not the values from the failed run.
• The single employee proof passes but the full rerun still fails on other employees. Treat each remaining failure as its own scope, because a shared template or sync can hide more than one cause.
• The source systems disagree on the correct state. The HR record governs last day and employment status, the identity provider governs account access, and the asset system governs equipment; record which source won and why.

Compatibility: mailbox archive agent at current versions, plus the HR, identity, payroll or asset system 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/pstcpJ3Xd-2F9QOaTfsyJZzg

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pstcpJ3Xd-2F9QOaTfsyJZzg

Thread query: agent stuck loop detected repeating the same step while trying to archive the departing employee mailbox after handover error failure

TL;DR: Fix this in mailbox archive agent by acting on the exact problem first: record each mailbox already archived in a run file keyed by user, check that file before archiving again, stop after the same user appears twice, and report mailboxes still open instead of retrying archived ones in a loop. Do not rerun the whole offboarding workflow unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one departing employee first, then rerun the full scope and verify access, assets and records.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

When an agent run to check build processing status hits this failure - kept repeating the same step and failed - do not retry the same step blindly. First check the real state in TestFlight to learn whether the step already took effect, then break the loop with a hard attempt budget, a state check before every retry, and a stop-and-report rule: before repeating the step, read the real store state and only repeat it if the desired end state is demonstrably absent, and never more than the budgeted times. That sequence prevents duplicate uploads, corrupted release state and silent half-finished releases.

agent loop detected: agent kept repeating the same check build processing status step and failed with error

Use this when

• An automated release run to check build processing status failed with this pattern.
• The workflow uses TestFlight and the failure appeared mid-run, after earlier steps may already have applied.
• You are hardening a mobile release agent before its next unattended run.

Not for this skill when

• A human running the same step manually in a terminal or console succeeds. That points at the underlying tool, not the agent wrapper.
• The store rejected the release on policy or metadata grounds. That is a store review issue, not an agent reliability failure.

Steps

1. Stop the run and check TestFlight for how many times the step actually took effect, for example duplicate builds, releases or uploads created by the repetitions. Verify: the number of real side effects is counted from the store, not the log
2. Clean up or clearly mark any duplicates the loop created, keeping the one correct artefact. Verify: only the intended artefact remains active
3. Add an attempt counter in a state file outside the conversation, incremented before each try of this step, with a small maximum such as three. Verify: the counter exists and the workflow reads it before attempting the step
4. Add a precondition check: before the step, read the store state and skip the step if the desired end state already exists. Verify: a test run with the end state present skips the step and logs why
5. Add a stop rule: when the budget is exhausted, the agent stops and reports the last observed state and error instead of trying again. Verify: a forced-failure test ends with a report, not another attempt
6. Re-run the workflow to check build processing status and watch the step execute at most the budgeted number of times. Verify: the run completes or stops cleanly within the budget
7. Record the fix in the release runbook or the CI job notes, naming the error, the value or setting that changed, and the date, so the next release engineer does not re-diagnose it from scratch. Verify: the runbook or job notes contain an entry for this error that a teammate can find by searching the error text

Why it happens

Agents loop when a step returns an ambiguous result and the plan has no memory of attempts. Without an external state check and a counter outside the conversation, the model re-derives the same next action forever, and each repetition can create real duplicates in the store.

In practice this failure is rarely a one-off. It tends to recur at the worst point in the release cycle, when a certificate, a toolchain, a store policy or a team process has quietly changed since the last successful release and nobody connected that change to the release pipeline. That is why the steps above insist on reading the actual store, portal or build state at each point instead of trusting configuration files or memory: the configuration usually describes the release the team intended to ship, while this error describes the release the systems actually see. Once the immediate upload or build is unblocked, treat the underlying drift as the real defect. Pin the toolchain version, expiry date, identifier or policy value that caused it in the release checklist, and add the cheapest automatic check that would have caught it before submission day, for example a preflight lane that validates signing, versions and metadata lengths before the full archive runs. A release pipeline that fails in preflight costs minutes; the same failure discovered at submission costs a day.

Variants and edge cases

agent failed to check build processing status reliability playbook

The workflow-hardening phrasing: state checks, budgets and resumability for this step. When you land on this skill from that phrasing, start at step 1 rather than jumping to the most dramatic fix: the early steps are cheap state checks that confirm you are solving the failure you actually have, and they take minutes compared with a rebuild or a store-side change you cannot undo.

TestFlight agent workflow failure recovery

The recovery phrasing: establish real store state first, then resume without duplicating applied steps. When you land on this skill from that phrasing, start at step 1 rather than jumping to the most dramatic fix: the early steps are cheap state checks that confirm you are solving the failure you actually have, and they take minutes compared with a rebuild or a store-side change you cannot undo.

Edge case: partial application

The hardest variant of every agent failure is the half-applied release. Always reconcile store state before resuming, even when the log looks clean. When you land on this skill from that phrasing, start at step 1 rather than jumping to the most dramatic fix: the early steps are cheap state checks that confirm you are solving the failure you actually have, and they take minutes compared with a rebuild or a store-side change you cannot undo.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_piWCSLYnKOiGLGNsKlJ7EQ

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_piWCSLYnKOiGLGNsKlJ7EQ

Thread query: agent loop detected: agent kept repeating the same check build processing status step and failed with error

TL;DR: When an agent run to check build processing status hits this failure - kept repeating the same step and failed - do not retry the same step blindly. First check the real state in TestFlight to learn whether the step already took effect, then break the loop with a hard attempt budget, a state check before every retry, and a stop-and-report rule: before repeating the step, read the real store state and only repeat it if the desired end state is demonstrably absent, and never more than the budgeted times. That sequence prevents duplicate uploads, corrupted release state and silent half-finished r

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

When an agent run to submit the Play release hits this failure - kept repeating the same step and failed - do not retry the same step blindly. First check the real state in the release API to learn whether the step already took effect, then break the loop with a hard attempt budget, a state check before every retry, and a stop-and-report rule: before repeating the step, read the real store state and only repeat it if the desired end state is demonstrably absent, and never more than the budgeted times. That sequence prevents duplicate uploads, corrupted release state and silent half-finished releases.

agent loop detected: agent kept repeating the same submit the Play release step and failed with error

Use this when

• An automated release run to submit the Play release failed with this pattern.
• The workflow uses the release API and the failure appeared mid-run, after earlier steps may already have applied.
• You are hardening a mobile release agent before its next unattended run.

Not for this skill when

• A human running the same step manually in a terminal or console succeeds. That points at the underlying tool, not the agent wrapper.
• The store rejected the release on policy or metadata grounds. That is a store review issue, not an agent reliability failure.

Steps

1. Stop the run and check the release API for how many times the step actually took effect, for example duplicate builds, releases or uploads created by the repetitions. Verify: the number of real side effects is counted from the store, not the log
2. Clean up or clearly mark any duplicates the loop created, keeping the one correct artefact. Verify: only the intended artefact remains active
3. Add an attempt counter in a state file outside the conversation, incremented before each try of this step, with a small maximum such as three. Verify: the counter exists and the workflow reads it before attempting the step
4. Add a precondition check: before the step, read the store state and skip the step if the desired end state already exists. Verify: a test run with the end state present skips the step and logs why
5. Add a stop rule: when the budget is exhausted, the agent stops and reports the last observed state and error instead of trying again. Verify: a forced-failure test ends with a report, not another attempt
6. Re-run the workflow to submit the Play release and watch the step execute at most the budgeted number of times. Verify: the run completes or stops cleanly within the budget
7. Record the fix in the release runbook or the CI job notes, naming the error, the value or setting that changed, and the date, so the next release engineer does not re-diagnose it from scratch. Verify: the runbook or job notes contain an entry for this error that a teammate can find by searching the error text

Why it happens

Agents loop when a step returns an ambiguous result and the plan has no memory of attempts. Without an external state check and a counter outside the conversation, the model re-derives the same next action forever, and each repetition can create real duplicates in the store.

In practice this failure is rarely a one-off. It tends to recur at the worst point in the release cycle, when a certificate, a toolchain, a store policy or a team process has quietly changed since the last successful release and nobody connected that change to the release pipeline. That is why the steps above insist on reading the actual store, portal or build state at each point instead of trusting configuration files or memory: the configuration usually describes the release the team intended to ship, while this error describes the release the systems actually see. Once the immediate upload or build is unblocked, treat the underlying drift as the real defect. Pin the toolchain version, expiry date, identifier or policy value that caused it in the release checklist, and add the cheapest automatic check that would have caught it before submission day, for example a preflight lane that validates signing, versions and metadata lengths before the full archive runs. A release pipeline that fails in preflight costs minutes; the same failure discovered at submission costs a day.

Variants and edge cases

agent failed to submit the Play release reliability playbook

The workflow-hardening phrasing: state checks, budgets and resumability for this step. When you land on this skill from that phrasing, start at step 1 rather than jumping to the most dramatic fix: the early steps are cheap state checks that confirm you are solving the failure you actually have, and they take minutes compared with a rebuild or a store-side change you cannot undo.

the release API agent workflow failure recovery

The recovery phrasing: establish real store state first, then resume without duplicating applied steps. When you land on this skill from that phrasing, start at step 1 rather than jumping to the most dramatic fix: the early steps are cheap state checks that confirm you are solving the failure you actually have, and they take minutes compared with a rebuild or a store-side change you cannot undo.

Edge case: partial application

The hardest variant of every agent failure is the half-applied release. Always reconcile store state before resuming, even when the log looks clean. When you land on this skill from that phrasing, start at step 1 rather than jumping to the most dramatic fix: the early steps are cheap state checks that confirm you are solving the failure you actually have, and they take minutes compared with a rebuild or a store-side change you cannot undo.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_u5vm7VvumijsKG6W6yyKpg

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_u5vm7VvumijsKG6W6yyKpg

Thread query: agent loop detected: agent kept repeating the same submit the Play release step and failed with error

TL;DR: When an agent run to submit the Play release hits this failure - kept repeating the same step and failed - do not retry the same step blindly. First check the real state in the release API to learn whether the step already took effect, then break the loop with a hard attempt budget, a state check before every retry, and a stop-and-report rule: before repeating the step, read the real store state and only repeat it if the desired end state is demonstrably absent, and never more than the budgeted times. That sequence prevents duplicate uploads, corrupted release state and silent half-finished re