Fix action history

[wintonzheng]

Important

Modify _get_action_results in agent.py to include specific fields in action and result model dumps.

• Behavior:
  • Modify _get_action_results in agent.py to include only action_type, element_id, status, reasoning, and option in action model dumps.
  • Include only success, exception_type, and exception_message in result model dumps.
• Misc:
  • No other files or functions are affected by this change.

^{This description was created by for 7e2874f. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[ellipsis-dev]

👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 486f8ef in 30 seconds

More details

• Looked at 124 lines of code in 3 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. skyvern/forge/agent.py:1219

• Draft comment:
  The logic to exclude successful actions from history is missing. Ensure that only unsuccessful actions are included in the action history as per the PR description.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful.

Workflow ID: wflow_u1s1UFHdTveUHUzH

---

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

[ellipsis-dev]

👍 Looks good to me! Reviewed everything up to 486f8ef in 39 seconds

More details

• Looked at 124 lines of code in 3 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. skyvern/forge/agent.py:1222

• Draft comment:
  The use of include here does not align with the PR description, which specifies excluding certain fields. Consider using exclude to remove workflow_run_id, intention, and response from the action model dumps.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable:
  The comment suggests a change that is not directly related to the diff, as the diff shows a switch to 'include' rather than 'exclude'. The fields mentioned in the comment ('workflow_run_id', 'intention', 'response') are not part of the 'include' list, so they are already excluded. The comment seems to be based on the PR description, which is not available, making it speculative.
  I might be missing the context of the PR description, which could provide more insight into the intention behind the changes. However, without this context, the comment appears speculative.
  Without the PR description, it's difficult to verify the comment's claim. The diff itself does not show any issue with the current 'include' usage.
  Delete the comment as it seems speculative and not directly related to the changes in the diff.

Workflow ID: wflow_re3Nq2aktHOMZo6d

---

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

[ellipsis-dev]

👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 7e2874f in 22 seconds

More details

• Looked at 38 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. skyvern/forge/agent.py:1219

• Draft comment:
  The logic to exclude successful actions from history is not implemented. Consider adding a filter to exclude actions where all results are successful.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

Workflow ID: wflow_NCGxyD9znmekopBZ

---

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.