Streaming the test run gives the user a live progress bar but no results:
NodeEvent carries node_id/title/status/error and nothing else, so a client
watching the stream learns which node is running, never what it produced.
The results already exist -- the run is a normal InvokeFrom.DEBUGGER draft
run, its node executions are in the database, and the editor's canvas
already knows how to render exactly that view. It was simply never told
which run to open.
So put the Dify run id where a client can reach it:
- NodeEvent gains run_id, filled from the streaming frame. Every non-ping
frame is stamped with workflow_run_id, so this arrives with the FIRST
node event -- while the run is still going, which is the point.
- The node SSE frame publishes it alongside the existing fields.
- mark_test_success / mark_test_error carry dify_run_id in both the Build
and Edit flows, so the terminal state names its run too.
This is what makes per-node results land on the graph, where a node's
inputs and outputs already have a home, instead of only as a JSON blob on
a conversation card.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Spec N4 has the build-complete card headline read "<App name> is ready", with
the annotation 名字只在回复句里念一次；记录卡上不出现 -- said once, in that
sentence, and never repeated on the completion receipt. We said it nowhere: the
card was titled "Build plan" and the engine had no app name to say.
DifyBuilderContext now carries app_name, seeded at session creation through a
get_app_name_fn seam alongside the existing revision/authorize ones. Env.rename_app
returns the name the database actually took rather than None, so the refine
records what landed instead of what it proposed -- the service normalizes after
the engine hands off, and the two can differ.
The headline is interpolated, so it gets a strings.py template or it would
survive localization untranslated. That pattern matches almost anything ending
in "is ready", so it sits last and every more specific template gets first
refusal.
The receipt already omitted the name; there is now a test pinning that.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Two App Builder spec changes that share the Builder session contract.
Naming (spec N1-N3): an app created from the homepage prompt is no longer named
by the user. core/dify_builder/naming.py cuts the prompt's opening clause at
create time -- instant and infallible, since it runs inside POST /apps -- and
CreateAppPayload.name becomes optional alongside a new prompt field. The Builder
then refines that name once during goal analysis, where a model and the detected
reply language are already in hand, so the judgement calls that are
English-shaped in pure Python (dropping an imperative lead-in, spotting a
contentless prompt) work in any language. Plan approval freezes the name.
Card options: SessionView gains a Decision carrying the gate's choice as options
inside the card plus a fixed confirm/cancel pair, replacing a button row whose
shape changed at every state. Option ids are the old action ids untouched, so
resolve_action_kind and the per-state legality check are unchanged, and
SessionView.actions keeps being populated -- the deployed web client goes on
working until it reads decision instead.
The regenerated console OpenAPI doc also picks up ErrorCard.diagnostics, missed
when cc9ca8b1dd landed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
api pods lose their logs on restart, so a failed build's real cause
("Workflow generator: structural validation failed: ...") could only be read
from a pod log that may already be gone. Session 01a08fd0 hit exactly that.
Carry the generator's own diagnostics back with the result instead:
BuildNodesResult and ErrorCard gain a ``diagnostics`` list, and build_nodes
records one entry per failed generation attempt -- initial AND the corrective
retry, so an error that changes between attempts stays visible -- plus the
all-rejected and exception paths.
Each entry holds a server-side UTC ``at`` (so the surviving pod-log window can
be searched around it), ``source``, ``attempt``, the generator's ``message``
(the same text the server logs), its ``codes``, and the full structured
``errors`` including ``node_id``. That is strictly more than the log line
carries: for an UNRESOLVED_REFERENCE the export now names the offending node.
The list rides in the ErrorCard's item payload, which is what the streamed
conversation item -- and therefore the exported debug log -- preserves. It is
not rendered in the UI. Retries that eventually succeed keep their breadcrumbs.
Deliberately not mirroring the "structural validation failed" prefix: build.py
cannot tell structural failures from the rest without duplicating the
generator's code taxonomy, which would go stale.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
When build-generate-graph failed at plan-approval, the error card always
showed one hardcoded generic message regardless of the actual cause
(UNRESOLVED_REFERENCE, non-object JSON, credit_balance_exhausted, ...).
Root cause: build_nodes() returned only list[MutationIntent]; on failure it
returned [], so the reason was logged internally but never reached the
handler, which had nothing to show but a fallback string.
Thread the reason out: build_nodes now returns BuildNodesResult{intents,
error}. _generation_error_text() extracts the best reason (top-level error
-> joined errors[].detail/message/code -> generic fallback), and every
failure path populates .error (generator error, all-intents-rejected, and
the except path via str(exc) so provider errors surface verbatim).
handle_plan_approval builds the ErrorCard body from build_result.error when
present, keeping the generic sentence only as a genuine fallback.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The build/edit test handlers wrapped run_draft in a bare, non-logging
`except Exception` that turned any launch-time failure into a blank failed
run (dify_run_id="", per_node=[], no error). Diagnose then had nothing to
act on and the repair loop ran blind — the prod symptom where a stale test
input (ValueError "<var> is required in input form") produced an
undiagnosable await_repair loop.
Now the launch error is logged, captured, and persisted so diagnose/routing
can act on it:
- Run.error field + dify_builder_runs.error column (migration a9cc8d552db4)
- handlers_build/edit: logger.exception + launch_error_text(exc) -> Run.error
- is_input_failure() also inspects Run.error (+ "in input form" signal), so a
stale-input launch failure routes to the testdata gate, not blind repair
- diagnose/_degraded_diagnosis surface the launch error when no node executed
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Render change sets directly in plan-style cards with affected node names,
IDs, and change details. Capture node metadata for proposed and applied
changes and persist it with conversation history.
Remove the view_changes action and expand/collapse state. Update generated
contracts, translations, and regression coverage.
Validation: 112 frontend tests and 742 backend unit tests passed.
Wu Tianwei
Charles YaoandClaude Opus 5
twwu