fix: use correct JobResult field names for credential error handling

[KeitaW]

Summary

Fixes incorrect JobResult constructor parameters in four credential-check locations. The code used success=False and error='...' but JobResult only has status and message fields. Pydantic silently ignores the unknown fields, causing credential failures to return SUCCESS instead of FAILED_NO_RETRY.

Affected jobs:

• UploadWorkflowFiles.execute() (L382-386)
• CleanupWorkflow.execute() (L1389-1393)
• UploadApp.execute() (L1730-1733)
• DeleteApp.execute() (L1790-1793)

Impact: When workflow_log.credential or workflow_app.credential is None, the worker logs "completed with status SUCCESS" while no files are uploaded to S3. This makes credential misconfiguration completely invisible.

Fix: Replace success=False, error='...' with status=JobStatus.FAILED_NO_RETRY, message='...' — matching the pattern used elsewhere (e.g., worker.py, backend_jobs.py).

Fixes #748

Test plan

• Deploy with workflow_log.credential unset
• Submit a workflow and verify worker logs show FAILED_NO_RETRY: Workflow log credential is not set
• Verify existing workflows with valid credentials still upload logs successfully

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Refactor
  • Updated job execution error handling to use improved failure status reporting when credentials are missing, enhancing consistency in how job failures are communicated.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The PR fixes incorrect JobResult field usage in four job methods. Previously, credential-missing early returns used non-existent success and error fields which Pydantic silently ignored, causing jobs to incorrectly report SUCCESS. Now they correctly use status=JobStatus.FAILED_NO_RETRY and message fields.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Credential Validation Bug Fixes src/utils/job/jobs.py	Fixed JobResult construction in four job methods: UploadWorkflowFiles.execute(), CleanupWorkflow.execute(), UploadApp.execute(), and DeleteApp.execute(). Changed from incorrect success=False, error=... parameters to correct status=JobStatus.FAILED_NO_RETRY, message=... parameters.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

Poem

🐰 The jobs once whispered "SUCCESS" with a sigh,
While credentials were missing—oh my, oh my!
Now with FAILED_NO_RETRY so bright,
No silent failures hide from sight!
The rabbit rejoices, bugs take their flight! 🎉

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: fixing incorrect JobResult field names in credential error handling across four job methods.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The PR directly addresses issue #748 by correcting all four JobResult constructor calls to use status=JobStatus.FAILED_NO_RETRY and message= instead of success=/error= fields.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are scoped to fixing the four credential-check early returns in job execute methods, matching the objectives in issue #748 with no unrelated modifications.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

src/utils/job/jobs.py (1)

382-385: Optional: Consider adding extra = 'forbid' to JobResult in jobs_base.py.

As noted in issue #748, adding Pydantic's extra = 'forbid' configuration to JobResult (similar to JobExecutionContext at lines 61-63 of this file) would catch incorrect constructor fields at creation time, preventing silent failures in the future.

# In src/utils/job/jobs_base.py
class JobResult(pydantic.BaseModel):
    status: JobStatus = JobStatus.SUCCESS
    message: Optional[str]

    class Config:
        extra = 'forbid'

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@src/utils/job/jobs.py` around lines 382 - 385, Add Pydantic strictness to the
JobResult model so unknown fields raise errors: update the JobResult class in
jobs_base.py to include an inner Config with extra = 'forbid' (similar to
JobExecutionContext's Config), ensuring JobResult(...) construction fails fast
on unexpected constructor fields.

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Nitpick comments:
In `@src/utils/job/jobs.py`:
- Around line 382-385: Add Pydantic strictness to the JobResult model so unknown
fields raise errors: update the JobResult class in jobs_base.py to include an
inner Config with extra = 'forbid' (similar to JobExecutionContext's Config),
ensuring JobResult(...) construction fails fast on unexpected constructor
fields.

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 0ade3af1-180d-465c-9d88-6e89d89365aa

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2e44c97 and acff603.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• src/utils/job/jobs.py