mirror of
https://github.com/ThearchyHelios/AgentLab.git
synced 2026-11-15 00:31:58 +00:00
ThearchyHelios
03c18c4d78
一、文案（前端约 1600 处，后端传到界面的约 880 处） - 术语统一：工作流层面用「运行」（继续运行、重新运行、试运行），节点和工具层面用「执行」，不再用「跑」； 总时长 / 执行时长 / 等待审批；服务端；助手；Agent；token；工作流；固定版本；模型接入；系统提示；批准 / 驳回；受管级别 - 口语改书面：取不到、没取回来、读不懂、连不上、多半、照样、兜底、揉成这类说法改成「无法 / 未能 / 失败 / 请」；去掉拟人写法 - 不再露出实现细节：界面上不写 checkpoint、同一拍、哈希（凭证处除外），不写改版历史（「以前…」「老数据」）； 报错、校验、门禁、自动修复里裸写的配置键名和枚举值换成界面上的中文标签，由新的 backend/app/engine/labels.py 统一提供； 发布弹窗里结论句的选项不再是 off / require_citation - 同一件事只留一种说法：生成阶段文案、出具档位说明、画布锁定提示各合成一份 - 去掉界面上的工业场景示例（MES、ERP、「张工」「王工」）和真实产品名，换成通用示例 二、说错的提示（都有测试证明） - 数据库测连接失败时的专用提示以前从不出现（按报错文字全等比较，永远比不上）：改为按错误类型判断，不再拼出重复的前缀 - 「设置 → 供应商」改指「设置 → 模型接入」；「在设置里建数据源」改指「数据」页 - 缺少 API Key、模型接入已停用的报错不再夹英文，写明去哪里填 - 两处原因说错（「这种引用在后续版本支持」「这一版还不支持」）改成真实原因 - 节点说明里不准确的说法改正：代码节点在 microVM 或系统沙箱中执行；报告撰写、口径卡的说明不再说过头 - 导出的证据 CSV 里两列同名，第三列改为「片段编号」 三、前后端对齐 - 前端按后端原文识别日志、报错的地方，新旧两种写法都认得（历史运行里存的是旧文字），逐条补了新旧原文的核对 - 后端交回模型的原指令放进单独的 for_model 字段，前端在解析响应时去掉，不会显示到界面上 四、检查 - 检查脚本里按原文匹配的断言改成新文案；改完会变成永远成立的反向断言逐条修正，并做了变异验证 - 新增 check-copy（静态扫描前端界面字符串和后端上界面的文案）：再出现「跑」「后端」「多半」「令牌」、 界面上的 Copilot、裸写的配置键名、半角标点等就报错；确需保留的写进 scripts/copy-allow.json 并注明理由
344 lines
15 KiB
Python
344 lines
15 KiB
Python
"""变量静态分析。
|
||
|
||
这套模板取不到值时渲染成空字符串（为了让半成品的图也能跑）。代价是拼错一个
|
||
变量名不会报错、不会警告、不留痕迹——下游拿到空文本，模型基于空内容一本正经
|
||
地编一段回答出来。这些测试守的就是"在跑之前把这件事说破"。
|
||
"""
|
||
|
||
from __future__ import annotations
|
||
|
||
from app.engine.schema import GraphSpec
|
||
from app.engine.variables import analyze
|
||
|
||
|
||
def _graph(nodes, edges=()):
|
||
return GraphSpec.model_validate({
|
||
"nodes": [
|
||
{"id": n["id"], "type": n["type"], "position": {"x": 0, "y": 0},
|
||
"data": {"label": n.get("label", ""), "config": n.get("config", {})}}
|
||
for n in nodes
|
||
],
|
||
"edges": [
|
||
{"source": e[0], "target": e[1], **({"sourceHandle": e[2]} if len(e) > 2 else {})}
|
||
for e in edges
|
||
],
|
||
})
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_lists_what_each_node_produces() -> None:
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "start", "type": "input", "label": "输入",
|
||
"config": {"fields": [{"name": "question", "description": "用户的问题"}]}},
|
||
{"id": "q", "type": "llm", "label": "取数", "config": {"assign_to": "sales"}},
|
||
], [("start", "q")])
|
||
paths = {v.path: v for v in analyze(g).variables}
|
||
|
||
assert "input.question" in paths
|
||
assert paths["input.question"].description == "用户的问题"
|
||
assert "vars.sales" in paths
|
||
assert paths["vars.sales"].produced_by == "q"
|
||
# 每个节点的输出都能被引用，不用显式声明
|
||
assert "nodes.start" in paths and "nodes.q" in paths
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_input_fields_are_also_available_as_vars() -> None:
|
||
"""入口节点把每个字段同时写进 vars（run_input 里 input 和 vars 是同一份）。
|
||
|
||
不认这一条，{{ vars.topic }} 这种完全合法的写法会被报成"未定义"——
|
||
误报是 linter 最坏的失败模式，它会让人把整个校验一起无视掉。
|
||
"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "start", "type": "input", "config": {"fields": [{"name": "topic"}]}},
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {"prompt": "{{ vars.topic }}"}},
|
||
], [("start", "a")])
|
||
assert [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level != "info"] == []
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_bare_namespace_roots_are_valid() -> None:
|
||
"""{{ input }} 取整个输入 dict，{{ vars }} 取整个变量池——都是合法写法。
|
||
|
||
上一版把这三个根跳过了没注册，于是 {{ input }} 被报成"没有任何节点产出"。
|
||
这不是一条无害的多余提示：runs 启动前要过校验，一条假错误意味着整张图
|
||
什么都跑不了。实际把问数据页整个卡住过。
|
||
"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "start", "type": "input", "config": {"fields": [{"name": "q"}]}},
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {
|
||
"prompt": "{{ input }} {{ vars }} {{ nodes }} {{ messages }} {{ last_message }}",
|
||
}},
|
||
], [("start", "a")])
|
||
bad = [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level in ("error", "warning")]
|
||
assert bad == [], [i.message for i in bad]
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_unknown_root_is_only_a_warning() -> None:
|
||
"""认不出的根可能只是我没建模的东西，不该拦住运行。
|
||
|
||
能穷举的（vars/input/nodes 的成员）才报 error——那几个命名空间的成员
|
||
全是从图里扫出来的，没扫到就是真没有。
|
||
"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {"prompt": "{{ 某个我不认识的东西.x }}"}},
|
||
])
|
||
issues = [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level != "info"]
|
||
assert len(issues) == 1 and issues[0].level == "warning", [i.model_dump() for i in issues]
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_input_is_open_when_no_fields_are_declared() -> None:
|
||
"""入口不声明字段时，input.* 是开放的——运行时传什么键都行。
|
||
|
||
问数据页就是这样：问题由系统注入成 input.question，而入口节点里一个
|
||
字段都没有（声明了反而会要求用户再填一次表单）。把它报成"未定义"会让
|
||
整条对话路径跑不起来——实际发生过。
|
||
"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "start", "type": "input", "config": {}},
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {"prompt": "{{ input.question }}"}},
|
||
], [("start", "a")])
|
||
assert [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level != "info"] == []
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_input_is_closed_once_fields_are_declared() -> None:
|
||
"""声明了字段就是闭集，那时候拼错才叫拼错。"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "start", "type": "input", "config": {"fields": [{"name": "question"}]}},
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {"prompt": "{{ input.quesiton }}"}},
|
||
], [("start", "a")])
|
||
errs = [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level == "error"]
|
||
assert len(errs) == 1 and "input.question" in errs[0].message
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_typo_is_reported_with_a_suggestion() -> None:
|
||
"""拼错是这里最常见的错误。只说"不存在"没用，能猜就直说。"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "start", "type": "input", "config": {"fields": [{"name": "question"}]}},
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "label": "作答",
|
||
"config": {"prompt": "回答：{{ input.quesiton }}"}},
|
||
], [("start", "a")])
|
||
errs = [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level == "error"]
|
||
|
||
assert len(errs) == 1
|
||
assert "input.quesiton" in errs[0].message
|
||
assert "input.question" in errs[0].message, "应该给出拼写建议"
|
||
assert errs[0].node_id == "a"
|
||
# 必须说清后果，否则用户不知道为什么"没报错但结果不对"
|
||
assert "空字符串" in errs[0].message
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_reference_before_production_is_a_warning() -> None:
|
||
"""变量确实存在，但那一步在这之后才跑——这时候取到的是空。
|
||
|
||
这类最难查：变量名拼对了，表里也有，就是值不对。
|
||
"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "start", "type": "input", "config": {"fields": [{"name": "q"}]}},
|
||
{"id": "use", "type": "llm", "label": "用它", "config": {"prompt": "{{ vars.later }}"}},
|
||
{"id": "make", "type": "llm", "label": "产出它", "config": {"assign_to": "later"}},
|
||
], [("start", "use"), ("use", "make")])
|
||
warns = [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level == "warning"]
|
||
|
||
assert len(warns) == 1
|
||
assert "vars.later" in warns[0].message
|
||
assert "产出它" in warns[0].message, "要说清是谁产出的"
|
||
assert warns[0].node_id == "use"
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_same_node_reading_its_own_var_is_fine() -> None:
|
||
"""循环里节点读自己上一轮写的变量是正常写法，不该报。"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "n", "type": "llm", "label": "累加",
|
||
"config": {"assign_to": "acc", "prompt": "上一轮：{{ vars.acc }}"}},
|
||
])
|
||
assert [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level in ("error", "warning")] == []
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_unused_variable_is_only_info() -> None:
|
||
"""产出没人用不一定是错，常常是改图改了一半——提一句，但别拦着跑。"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "label": "算一下", "config": {"assign_to": "unused"}},
|
||
])
|
||
issues = analyze(g).issues
|
||
assert [i.level for i in issues] == ["info"]
|
||
assert "vars.unused" in issues[0].message
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_drilling_into_a_value_is_fine_but_the_variable_must_exist() -> None:
|
||
"""往值内部钻不校验（结构是运行期才有的），但第二段必须存在。
|
||
|
||
分寸就在这里：退得太松，{{ input.quesiton }} 会退到 input 被当成合法，
|
||
拼写检查整个失效；退得太紧，{{ vars.rows[0].name }} 会被误报。
|
||
"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {
|
||
"assign_to": "rows",
|
||
"prompt": "{{ vars.rows[0].name }} {{ nodes.a.text }}", # 都该通过
|
||
}},
|
||
{"id": "b", "type": "llm", "config": {
|
||
"prompt": "{{ vars.rowz[0].name }}", # 第二段拼错了
|
||
}},
|
||
], [("a", "b")])
|
||
errs = [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level == "error"]
|
||
assert len(errs) == 1, [i.message for i in errs]
|
||
assert "vars.rowz" in errs[0].message and errs[0].node_id == "b"
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_builtins_and_filters_and_indexes_resolve() -> None:
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {
|
||
"prompt": "{{ last_message }} {{ vars.rows[0].name }} {{ nodes.a.text | json }}",
|
||
"assign_to": "rows",
|
||
}},
|
||
])
|
||
assert [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level != "info"] == []
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_scans_nested_config_not_just_top_level() -> None:
|
||
"""output.fields[].value、code 节点的 files 都是嵌套的，漏扫等于没扫。"""
|
||
g = _graph([
|
||
{"id": "out", "type": "output", "config": {
|
||
"fields": [{"name": "结果", "value": "{{ vars.nope }}"}],
|
||
}},
|
||
])
|
||
errs = [i for i in analyze(g).issues if i.level == "error"]
|
||
assert len(errs) == 1 and "vars.nope" in errs[0].message
|
||
assert "fields[0].value" in errs[0].path or errs[0].path == "vars.nope"
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_cycle_does_not_hang() -> None:
|
||
"""循环图很常见（loop 的 body 连回 loop 本身），拓扑分析不能死循环。"""
|
||
g = _graph(
|
||
[{"id": "a", "type": "llm"}, {"id": "b", "type": "llm"}],
|
||
[("a", "b"), ("b", "a")],
|
||
)
|
||
assert analyze(g).variables # 跑得完就行
|
||
|
||
|
||
# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
# 循环变量
|
||
# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
#
|
||
# 模板⑦「批量处理（循环）」装好就红着：{{ vars.item }} 被报成"没有任何节点
|
||
# 产出"，而那是循环最正常的写法。它是唯一一个内置模板开箱就报错的，
|
||
# 新用户点开第一眼看到的就是红字，运行按钮还是灰的。
|
||
#
|
||
# 根因不在模板，在这里：产出侧从来没登记过循环注入的变量
|
||
# （control.py:142 每轮写 vars.<item_var> 和 vars.<item_var>_index）。
|
||
# kind="loop" 在 _KIND_ORDER 里一直有位置，只是没人产出过。
|
||
|
||
|
||
def _loop_graph(*, item_var="item", body_ref="{{ vars.item }}", extra_node=None):
|
||
"""input → loop →(body) handle → 回到 loop；loop →(done) out。
|
||
|
||
末尾那条回边是关键：它让 loop 的拓扑深度反而大于自己的循环体。
|
||
"""
|
||
nodes = [
|
||
{"id": "start", "type": "input", "config": {"fields": [{"name": "items"}]}},
|
||
{"id": "each", "type": "loop", "label": "逐条循环",
|
||
"config": {"mode": "foreach", "items": "{{ input.items }}", "item_var": item_var}},
|
||
{"id": "handle", "type": "llm", "label": "处理单条", "config": {"prompt": body_ref}},
|
||
{"id": "out", "type": "output", "config": {}},
|
||
]
|
||
if extra_node:
|
||
nodes.append(extra_node)
|
||
edges = [("start", "each"), ("each", "handle", "body"),
|
||
("handle", "each"), ("each", "out", "done")]
|
||
if extra_node:
|
||
edges.append(("out", extra_node["id"]))
|
||
return _graph(nodes, edges)
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_loop_item_is_a_known_variable() -> None:
|
||
"""循环体里引用 {{ vars.item }} 不该被报成未定义。"""
|
||
report = analyze(_loop_graph())
|
||
paths = {v.path for v in report.variables}
|
||
assert "vars.item" in paths
|
||
assert "vars.item_index" in paths
|
||
|
||
errors = [i for i in report.issues if i.level == "error"]
|
||
assert not errors, [i.message for i in errors]
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_loop_item_follows_the_configured_name() -> None:
|
||
report = analyze(_loop_graph(item_var="row", body_ref="{{ vars.row }}"))
|
||
paths = {v.path for v in report.variables}
|
||
assert {"vars.row", "vars.row_index"} <= paths
|
||
assert not [i for i in report.issues if i.level == "error"]
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_no_false_ordering_warning_inside_the_loop_body() -> None:
|
||
"""循环体的拓扑深度因为回边天然小于循环节点，套用"先后"判定必然误报。
|
||
|
||
以前报的是"{{ vars.item }} 由「逐条循环」产出，但那一步在这之后才跑"——
|
||
而那正是循环最正常的写法。
|
||
"""
|
||
report = analyze(_loop_graph())
|
||
assert not [i for i in report.issues if "在这之后才执行" in i.message], \
|
||
[i.message for i in report.issues]
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_loop_variable_outside_the_body_still_warns() -> None:
|
||
"""但在循环体**外面**引用它确实取不到值，这条要留着。"""
|
||
outside = {"id": "after", "type": "llm", "label": "循环之后",
|
||
"config": {"prompt": "{{ vars.item }}"}}
|
||
report = analyze(_loop_graph(extra_node=outside))
|
||
warns = [i for i in report.issues if i.node_id == "after"]
|
||
assert warns, [i.message for i in report.issues]
|
||
assert "只在循环体内部有值" in warns[0].message
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_while_loop_has_no_current_item() -> None:
|
||
"""while 模式不遍历列表，自然没有"当前项"（control.py 只在 foreach 分支注入）。"""
|
||
report = analyze(_graph([
|
||
{"id": "lp", "type": "loop",
|
||
"config": {"mode": "while", "condition": "vars.done != True", "item_var": "item"}},
|
||
]))
|
||
assert "vars.item" not in {v.path for v in report.variables}
|
||
|
||
|
||
# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
# 表达式字段里的裸引用
|
||
# --------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_bare_refs_in_expression_fields_count_as_usage() -> None:
|
||
"""表达式字段写的是裸 vars.x，没有 {{ }}——只扫模板语法会认不出来。
|
||
|
||
模板⑦里 `(vars.collected or '') + str(vars.one)` 就是这样，
|
||
于是 vars.one 被报成"产出了但没有任何地方引用"，而它明明在用。
|
||
"""
|
||
report = analyze(_graph([
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {"prompt": "x", "assign_to": "one"}},
|
||
{"id": "b", "type": "transform", "config": {
|
||
"mode": "expression",
|
||
"expression": "(vars.collected or '') + str(vars.one)",
|
||
"assign_to": "collected",
|
||
}},
|
||
], [("a", "b")]))
|
||
|
||
one = next(v for v in report.variables if v.path == "vars.one")
|
||
assert one.refs, "表达式里用了就不该说没人用"
|
||
assert not [i for i in report.issues if "vars.one" in i.message]
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_branch_case_conditions_count_as_usage() -> None:
|
||
report = analyze(_graph([
|
||
{"id": "a", "type": "llm", "config": {"prompt": "x", "assign_to": "score"}},
|
||
{"id": "b", "type": "branch", "config": {
|
||
"mode": "expression",
|
||
"cases": [{"key": "hi", "condition": "vars.score > 3"}],
|
||
}},
|
||
], [("a", "b")]))
|
||
assert next(v for v in report.variables if v.path == "vars.score").refs
|
||
|
||
|
||
def test_auto_provided_variables_are_not_nagged_about() -> None:
|
||
"""系统自动提供的变量不报"没人用"——作者没声明过它，提醒他等于噪音。
|
||
|
||
内置变量（last_message 等）本来就不在这条路上；循环的 item_index 和
|
||
入口字段的 vars.<name> 别名以前会被报，而真正的 input.<name> 用着呢。
|
||
"""
|
||
report = analyze(_loop_graph())
|
||
unused = [i.message for i in report.issues if "没有任何地方引用" in i.message]
|
||
assert not any("item_index" in m for m in unused), unused
|
||
assert not any("vars.items" in m for m in unused), unused
|