fix(worker): add missing throttled property in step output

[lqmanh]

What changed? Why was the change needed?

When using step.throttle via code-based workflows, this error is raised:

{
  "url": "...",
  "statusCode": 400,
  "message": "Workflow with id: `direct-message` has an invalid state. Step with id: `throttle-step` has invalid result. Please provide the correct step result.",
  "code": "ExecutionStateResultInvalidError",
  "data": [
    {
      "path": "",
      "message": "must have required property 'throttled'"
    }
  ],
  "cause": {
    "name": "HTTPError",
    "code": "ERR_NON_2XX_3XX_RESPONSE",
    "timings": {
      ...
    }
  }
}

Expand for optional sections

Related enterprise PR

Special notes for your reviewer

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for dashboard-v2-novu-staging canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	6c5bfa6
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/dashboard-v2-novu-staging/deploys/69923e848ba7a70008d454e1

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

End-to-end throttle tests were changed to iterate over all completed and skipped jobs, validating each job's stepOutput fields (throttled, threshold, executionCount) across multiple scenarios instead of checking a single skipped job. The add-job use case was modified so that when a throttle check results in not skipping (shouldSkip === false), the job record is updated with stepOutput.throttled = false and the current executionCount and threshold before proceeding. No public APIs or exported signatures were changed.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: adding the missing 'throttled' property to step output in the worker, which directly addresses the validation error reported in the PR.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description clearly relates to the changeset by explaining the validation error that occurs when using step.throttle and indicating that the fix adds the missing 'throttled' property.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Merge Conflict Detection	✅ Passed	✅ No merge conflicts detected when merging into next

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

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents

In `@apps/api/src/app/events/e2e/throttle-events.e2e.ts`:
- Around line 100-106: The assertions assume DB returns completedThrottleJobs in
a deterministic order; instead make the check order-independent by collecting
execution counts from completedThrottleJobs (accessing
job.stepOutput?.executionCount) and asserting the resulting set/array contains
the expected values (e.g., {1,2,3} or includes each expected count) rather than
comparing to index + 1; update the loop/expectations around
completedThrottleJobs in throttle-events.e2e.ts to perform this set membership
check.

♻️ Duplicate comments (1)

apps/api/src/app/events/e2e/throttle-events.e2e.ts (1)

181-195: Same ordering issue as above for executionCount.

These assertions also assume deterministic ordering from the repository. Apply the same order-independent pattern as the earlier block.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

Avoid relying on DB order for executionCount assertions.

find() ordering isn’t guaranteed, so index + 1 can be flaky. Prefer order-independent checks.

🔧 Suggested change

-    completedThrottleJobs.forEach((job, index) => {
+    completedThrottleJobs.forEach((job) => {
       expect(job.stepOutput).to.be.ok;
       expect(job.stepOutput?.throttled).to.equal(false);
       expect(job.stepOutput?.threshold).to.equal(3);
-      expect(job.stepOutput?.executionCount).to.equal(index + 1);
     });
+
+    const executionCounts = completedThrottleJobs
+      .map((job) => job.stepOutput?.executionCount)
+      .filter((count): count is number => typeof count === 'number')
+      .sort((a, b) => a - b);
+    expect(executionCounts).to.deep.equal([1, 2]);

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In `@apps/api/src/app/events/e2e/throttle-events.e2e.ts` around lines 100 - 106,
The assertions assume DB returns completedThrottleJobs in a deterministic order;
instead make the check order-independent by collecting execution counts from
completedThrottleJobs (accessing job.stepOutput?.executionCount) and asserting
the resulting set/array contains the expected values (e.g., {1,2,3} or includes
each expected count) rather than comparing to index + 1; update the
loop/expectations around completedThrottleJobs in throttle-events.e2e.ts to
perform this set membership check.

[coderabbitai]

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

apps/worker/src/app/workflow/usecases/add-job/add-job.usecase.ts (1)

298-310: Good fix — correctly sets throttled: false on the non-skip path.

This resolves the reported validation error by ensuring stepOutput is populated regardless of the throttle outcome.

One minor note: handleThrottle has several early-return paths (lines 843, 850, 856, 863, 869) that return { shouldSkip: false } without executionCount or threshold. In those cases, undefined values will be written to the DB. This is unlikely to cause a runtime failure but may confuse downstream consumers expecting numeric values.

Optional: default to safe values

         } else {
           await this.jobRepository.updateOne(
             { _id: job._id, _environmentId: command.environmentId },
             {
               $set: {
                 stepOutput: {
                   throttled: false,
-                  executionCount: throttleResult.executionCount,
-                  threshold: throttleResult.threshold,
+                  executionCount: throttleResult.executionCount ?? 0,
+                  threshold: throttleResult.threshold ?? 0,
                 },
               },
             }
           );
         }