Improve schedule execution visibility for recipes that failed#5346
Improve schedule execution visibility for recipes that failed#5346
Conversation
|
Question on an adjacent workflow: if a user turns a session into a recipe, or asks goose to make a recipe, does a prompt get added? It might seem odd for a user to ask goose to make them a recipe, then try to schedule it, and then see a message that it didn't run because there was no prompt. In the GitHub issue thread I think we had talked about having goose inject a prompt like "go follow the user instructions" if no prompt was present. |
| } | ||
| schedule_sessions.sort_by(|a, b| b.0.cmp(&a.0)); | ||
| // Sort by created_at timestamp, newest first | ||
| schedule_sessions.sort_by(|a, b| b.1.created_at.cmp(&a.1.created_at)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Newer sessions were at the bottom of the list, again causing a confusing UX
@iandouglas good point. Next thing I was planning to do was to explicitly validate recipe prompt presence for schedules and ask the user for it, but adding "go follow the user instructions" sounds even simpler as long as the instructions provide enough guidance |
|
@iandouglas any thoughts on #5359 instead? |
left a comment over there, yeah that sounds perfect. |
|
Closing in favour of #5359 |
2 participants
Summary
Problem
When a recipe has no
promptfield, the scheduler:schedule_idSolution
Create visible failed sessions with error messages that show up in the UI, so users can see what went wrong.
Note
This is primarily for backwards compatibility. The root cause issue is that we allow schedules to be created off recipes with empty prompts, but that'll be addressed in a follow up PR.
Type of Change
Related Issues
Relates to #5045
Screenshots/Demos (for UX changes)
Before:
After:
