agent loop detected: re-running typedoc on unchanged source files

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Hash the source inputs and skip TypeDoc when nothing changed. The loop is the agent re-running generation unconditionally instead of checking whether inputs moved.

Error

(agent ran typedoc 12 times in one job; sources unchanged; no error text)

Steps

1. Confirm the loop: check run logs for repeated identical TypeDoc invocations with no source changes between them. Expected: the repetition pattern visible.
2. Add a change gate: hash the entry points and tsconfig (e.g. a checksum file), and skip generation when the hash matches the last run. Expected: generation runs only on real changes.
3. Alternatively, gate on the build tool's own incrementality: only run the docs job when source files changed in the triggering commit or PR. Expected: the docs job is change-triggered.
4. Re-run the agent job on an unchanged tree. Expected: TypeDoc is skipped and the job finishes fast.

When to use

• The agent re-runs doc generation in a loop
• Generation takes significant time on every iteration
• Sources are provably unchanged between runs

When not to use

• TypeDoc fails (fix the failure, not the scheduling)
• Sources actually change each iteration (the runs are legitimate)
• The loop is in a different tool (apply the same hashing idea there)

Tool compatibility

TypeDoc with any agent orchestrator. The hash-and-skip pattern works for Sphinx and JSDoc too.

Variant phrasings

loop detected across scheduled runs, not within one job

Persist the hash between runs (a state file or cache) so the next scheduled run can compare.

agent re-runs because output timestamps change

Hash inputs, not outputs; output timestamps always change.

Why it happens

Agents default to "generate then check", and without a change gate the generate step runs every iteration. TypeDoc is slow enough that the repetition dominates the job.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_qiqOVQwLYlbz5iyWGn0n8A

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_qiqOVQwLYlbz5iyWGn0n8A

Thread query: agent loop detected: re-running typedoc on unchanged source files

TL;DR: Hash the source inputs and skip TypeDoc when nothing changed. The loop is the agent re-running generation unconditionally instead of checking whether inputs moved.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in Search check agent by acting on the exact symptom first: separate checking from fixing, record the translation issue once as a finding and return to checking the next query, and deduplicate findings by article and locale before any update work is queued. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.

Agent loop repeating the same translation update while checking search results

Use this when

• Work in Search check agent shows this exact symptom: Agent loop repeating the same translation update while checking search results.
• The same symptom repeats after a retry with unchanged inputs.
• Readers or support agents are blocked until this item is corrected.

Not for this skill when

• The help center platform itself is down or returning outage notices. Resolve that first, then return here if this symptom remains.
• The content is correct and you only want a style or tone rewrite. That is an editorial pass, not this fix.

Steps

1. Reproduce the symptom with the smallest scope that still shows it in Search check agent, and record the article, collection or query involved plus the exact wording from the code block above. Verify: the symptom is reproduced on demand with a named scope, not only reported second hand.
2. Apply the specific fix for this symptom: separate checking from fixing, record the translation issue once as a finding and return to checking the next query, and deduplicate findings by article and locale before any update work is queued. Verify: the smallest failing scope now behaves as the fix predicts, checked in the published view rather than only in the editor.
3. Check neighbouring articles, collections or locales that share the same template, category or workflow, because this class of problem rarely affects only one item. Verify: the neighbouring items are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Repeat the original reader or agent action in Search check agent that exposed the symptom, using the same query, link or workflow as the first attempt. Verify: the action completes and the original symptom does not appear.
5. Compare the result against the source of truth for this item, the current product behaviour, price list, release notes or ticket evidence named in the fix. Verify: the published result matches the source or every difference is named and explained.
6. Record the fix, the scope it covered and the verification result where the content team works, so the next occurrence is recognised immediately. Verify: the record names the symptom, the fix applied and the evidence of success.

Variant phrasings

Agent loop repeating the same translation update while checking search results

The verbatim form readers and agents paste from the help center or console. Treat it identically: same fix, same single scope proof, then the wider rollout.

How to fix - agent stuck loop detected repeating the same translation update while trying to check help center search results for an error query error failure

The how to phrasing for the same problem in Search check agent. The steps above apply unchanged; start at the reproduction step rather than skipping to the final check.

Search check agent troubleshooting for this symptom

The symptom first phrasing used when the full message is hidden. Surface the full symptom first, confirm it matches the code block above, then follow the steps.

Why it happens

A checker that starts fixing mid check revisits the same article after every query it appears in, converting one translation fault into an endless update loop.

Edge cases

• The symptom appears in one locale, collection or audience view only. Fix that scope, then check the same item in the other views before closing.
• A cached or indexed copy keeps showing the old state after the fix. Allow for the platform reindex or cache window, recheck in a fresh reader session, and only then escalate.
• Two items have near identical titles. Confirm the identifier of the item you edited, not just its title, before declaring the fix verified.

Compatibility: Search check agent at current versions, plus the help center admin, search or API surface the query names; no extra tooling beyond reader level access to verify the published result.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_BtKJ9jw-Jk2-F748Xc2lTw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_BtKJ9jw-Jk2-F748Xc2lTw

Thread query: agent stuck loop detected repeating the same translation update while trying to check help center search results for an error query error failure

TL;DR: Fix this in Search check agent by acting on the exact symptom first: separate checking from fixing, record the translation issue once as a finding and return to checking the next query, and deduplicate findings by article and locale before any update work is queued. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.

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