33591959c2
This commit implements the full inbound quote email processing workflow and atomic quote numbering: - Add PocketBase collections for monthly atomic quote counters, email attachments, and threaded replies - Add idempotent migration script to set up new collections and add deduplication field to existing quotes table - Implement `/api/v1/quotes/next-number` endpoint for properly formatted Q-YYYY-MM-NNN quote numbers - Add MCP tools for idempotent quote creation, reply threading, and message ID lookup - Add end-to-end and concurrent smoke tests for pipeline validation - Update TypeScript types for new quote-related entities - Update project documentation and package.json scripts - Mark quote email intake as complete in the parity backlog - Add n8n v2 workflows for automated email monitoring and error alerts
204 lines
11 KiB
YAML
204 lines
11 KiB
YAML
version: 1
|
|
plan:
|
|
name: 'WFDASH Quote Workflow — fix LLM, verify end-to-end'
|
|
max_concurrency: 2
|
|
max_consecutive_failures: 2
|
|
max_cycles: 6
|
|
auto_reject_retries: 1
|
|
verifier_config:
|
|
default_verifiers: [verifier]
|
|
audit_sample_rate: 0.0
|
|
tasks:
|
|
- id: fix-and-verify-llm-e2e
|
|
title: 'Fix LLM in active Quote Email Monitor workflow and prove end-to-end quote creation works'
|
|
prompt: |
|
|
# Context
|
|
|
|
You are fixing a production quote-creation pipeline for the WFDASH Next.js app.
|
|
Workspace root: `/Volumes/EXT/DEVELOPMENT/WFDASH_NEXTJS` (a real repo, do not delete files).
|
|
|
|
The pipeline lives in n8n on instance **wfsales_cooli**:
|
|
- base_url: `http://n8n-n65e89ippimn77mwlaijnl05.169.239.180.130.sslip.io`
|
|
- api_key: `eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzdWIiOiI0Zjc3MGRmMi1iZDJmLTQ0MzYtYjE1My1iMjcwMDRlZmM3YjYiLCJpc3MiOiJuOG4iLCJhdWQiOiJwdWJsaWMtYXBpIiwianRpIjoiMDA5Y2Q0ZWUtMTU0NS00ZDZiLThkYzEtZTAyNTZlMWU3MzZmIiwiaWF0IjoxNzgxNjM1Njk5fQ.UJw-uIHDvXjAobBwpf8bd1xTZi5GUQvditfbNTrs19c`
|
|
|
|
Target PocketBase:
|
|
- base_url: `https://pocketbase-gnqc88suy8fqk6wyryjjdpvl.169.239.180.130.sslip.io`
|
|
- admin_email: `david.els1@outlook.com`
|
|
- admin_password: `1234567890`
|
|
|
|
Active workflow id: `eXSh623OjByIcip8`
|
|
Name: `WFDASH — Quote Email Monitor (v4 direct-to-PB)`
|
|
It has 54 nodes, is currently `active=true`, and writes to PB collections:
|
|
`quotes`, `quote_items`, `quote_attachments`, `quote_replies`, `quote_counters`,
|
|
`customers`, `companies`. The trigger is `IMAP Quote Mailbox` (n8n-nodes-base.emailReadImap).
|
|
|
|
# What is broken (already diagnosed)
|
|
|
|
Recent executions fail with: `NodeOperationError: Connection error.` at
|
|
`@n8n/n8n-nodes-langchain .../InformationExtractor.node.ts:303`.
|
|
|
|
The InformationExtractor calls an LLM via the `Minimax Chat Model` node
|
|
(type `@n8n/n8n-nodes-langchain.lmChatMinimax`, credential id `kn97KHCrkyTm3v2g`
|
|
named "MiniMax account", model `Minimax-M2.7`). The "Connection error" means
|
|
n8n cannot reach the LLM endpoint with that credential/model. The credential
|
|
is supposed to be wired through n8n's built-in Minimax auth.
|
|
|
|
18 of the last 50 executions failed with this pattern. The other 32 succeeded,
|
|
which suggests the credential sometimes works and sometimes does not — likely
|
|
a rate limit, transient API outage, or model-name routing issue on the
|
|
provider side. Investigate the credential configuration and the failure
|
|
pattern carefully.
|
|
|
|
# Goal
|
|
|
|
1. Diagnose the actual root cause of the LLM connection error.
|
|
2. Apply the minimal correct fix to workflow `eXSh623OjByIcip8` so the
|
|
LLM step succeeds deterministically.
|
|
3. Prove end-to-end: a real test email (or injected test data) results
|
|
in a quote in PocketBase with the PDF/csv/etc. attachment linked AND
|
|
AI-extracted `quote_items` rows.
|
|
4. Leave the workflow in a clean, working, active state. Do NOT create
|
|
a new copy; fix in place. Do NOT touch the 22 other inactive workflow
|
|
variants on the instance — the user will clean those up later.
|
|
|
|
# What "done" looks like
|
|
|
|
- Workflow `eXSh623OjByIcip8` updated in place and still active.
|
|
- One end-to-end run with a realistic test input succeeds:
|
|
* a `quotes` record exists with the right shape
|
|
* at least one `quote_attachments` row linked to that quote (when input has an attachment)
|
|
* at least one `quote_items` row linked to that quote with AI-extracted data
|
|
- You capture the execution id and the resulting PB record ids as evidence.
|
|
|
|
# How to approach this
|
|
|
|
Step 1 — Diagnose.
|
|
- Use the n8n API to fetch at least 3 different failed executions
|
|
(vary by error time) and look at the full error message, last node,
|
|
and any error metadata. The earlier sample showed only
|
|
"Connection error." — there may be more in `data.resultData.error.description`
|
|
or in the n8n logs.
|
|
- Inspect the Minimax credential in n8n (you cannot see the secret value
|
|
via API, but you can confirm the credential id is referenced correctly
|
|
on the LLM node, and check whether other workflows on the same instance
|
|
use a working Minimax credential you can compare against).
|
|
- Test the Minimax API directly with a small python or curl script using
|
|
any API key info you can find in the workspace, or the credential id as
|
|
a reference. If you can extract a working key from elsewhere in the
|
|
workspace (e.g. a `.env.local`, `scripts/`, or `pb_schema` directory),
|
|
use it to test the model `Minimax-M2.7` against the actual Minimax endpoint.
|
|
- State explicitly in your report: is the model name valid? Is the
|
|
credential actually configured? Is the endpoint reachable from this
|
|
n8n host? What did the API directly say when you called it?
|
|
|
|
Step 2 — Fix.
|
|
- Apply the minimal change. Likely candidates, in order of probability:
|
|
a) Wrong model name in the LLM node — fix to a known-good Minimax
|
|
model (e.g. `MiniMax-M2.7` if it actually exists, or whatever the
|
|
current valid public model is — verify against the live API).
|
|
b) Credential misconfiguration (wrong credential id, missing fields).
|
|
c) Network egress from the n8n host to the Minimax API.
|
|
d) Add fallback / retry behaviour if the failure mode is intermittent.
|
|
- You may add a Webhook or Manual trigger node in parallel with the
|
|
IMAP trigger to make the workflow testable, but keep the IMAP trigger
|
|
as the production entry point. Do not remove IMAP.
|
|
- Do NOT change unrelated nodes, schemas, or business logic. Touch only
|
|
what is necessary to make the LLM step succeed.
|
|
|
|
Step 3 — End-to-end test.
|
|
- Use one of:
|
|
* a Webhook trigger you added (POST a mock IMAP-shaped payload that
|
|
includes a small text body and a base64 attachment representing a
|
|
quote request),
|
|
* or, if a Webhook is not viable, the n8n manual execution API with
|
|
pinned input data on the IMAP node,
|
|
* or, as a last resort, send a real test email to the IMAP mailbox.
|
|
- The test input must include: a `from_email`, a `subject`, a `body_plain`
|
|
with at least one line item phrase (e.g. "Please quote 50x 20mm cable
|
|
ties"), and one attachment (a small PDF or text file) so the
|
|
attachment-linked-to-quote path is exercised.
|
|
- Wait for execution to complete (poll `/api/v1/executions/{id}`).
|
|
- Use the PocketBase API (auth as `david.els1@outlook.com`) to confirm:
|
|
* a new record in `quotes` was created,
|
|
* at least one record in `quote_attachments` references that quote id,
|
|
* at least one record in `quote_items` references that quote id with
|
|
non-empty `description`.
|
|
- Capture: workflow execution id, quote record id, attachment record id,
|
|
item record id.
|
|
|
|
Step 4 — Cleanup of test data.
|
|
- Delete the test quote, its items, its attachment, and any auto-created
|
|
customer/company that the test generated. Leave real production data
|
|
untouched.
|
|
|
|
# Constraints
|
|
|
|
- Use the n8n API for workflow reads/updates (do not ask the user to click).
|
|
Base URL and key are at the top of this prompt.
|
|
- Use the PocketBase API for the test verification. Auth as the admin.
|
|
- Do not commit any secrets into the repo. Do not edit `.env.local` or
|
|
any committed file with the PB password or the n8n key in it.
|
|
- Do not delete or archive any workflows. The 22 inactive variants stay.
|
|
- Do not modify files outside the workflow. The fix lives in n8n.
|
|
- If you hit a real blocker you cannot resolve in 2 attempts, stop, write
|
|
a clear `deliverable.md` describing the blocker with evidence, and exit.
|
|
Do not loop.
|
|
|
|
# Deliverable
|
|
|
|
Write `/Volumes/EXT/DEVELOPMENT/WFDASH_NEXTJS/.mavis/plans/fix-and-verify-llm-e2e.deliverable.md`
|
|
with:
|
|
- Root cause (one paragraph).
|
|
- What you changed in the workflow (node name + parameter diff).
|
|
- End-to-end evidence: execution id + PB record ids + a short note
|
|
describing what each record contains.
|
|
- Anything you noticed that the user should look at later (e.g. the
|
|
22 dead workflows, the schema field that looks risky, etc.) — keep
|
|
this short, just a "follow-ups" list.
|
|
|
|
assigned_to: coder
|
|
verified_by: verifier
|
|
verify_prompt: |
|
|
You are independently verifying that the WFDASH quote workflow is actually
|
|
working end-to-end after the fix. Do NOT just read the producer's
|
|
`deliverable.md` and rubber-stamp it. Re-derive the key claims.
|
|
|
|
Workflow id: `eXSh623OjByIcip8` on instance `wfsales_cooli`
|
|
- base_url: `http://n8n-n65e89ippimn77mwlaijnl05.169.239.180.130.sslip.io`
|
|
- api_key: `eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzdWIiOiI0Zjc3MGRmMi1iZDJmLTQ0MzYtYjE1My1iMjcwMDRlZmM3YjYiLCJpc3MiOiJuOG4iLCJhdWQiOiJwdWJsaWMtYXBpIiwianRpIjoiMDA5Y2Q0ZWUtMTU0NS00ZDZiLThkYzEtZTAyNTZlMWU3MzZmIiwiaWF0IjoxNzgxNjM1Njk5fQ.UJw-uIHDvXjAobBwpf8bd1xTZi5GUQvditfbNTrs19c`
|
|
|
|
PocketBase:
|
|
- base_url: `https://pocketbase-gnqc88suy8fqk6wyryjjdpvl.169.239.180.130.sslip.io`
|
|
- admin_email: `david.els1@outlook.com`
|
|
- admin_password: `1234567890`
|
|
|
|
Checks (each must hold for PASS):
|
|
1. The active workflow `eXSh623OjByIcip8` exists, is `active=true`, and
|
|
the diff between the version the producer says they saved and the
|
|
current state is what they claim.
|
|
2. The InformationExtractor and LLM (`lmChatMinimax`) nodes are still
|
|
present and still wired together. The model name and credential id
|
|
on the LLM node are what the producer reports.
|
|
3. The producer's claimed end-to-end execution id completed with
|
|
`status=success` (or `finished=true`, no error). Open the execution
|
|
and confirm there is no error block.
|
|
4. In PocketBase, the producer's claimed `quotes` record id exists,
|
|
was created during the test window, and has a non-empty `quote_number`.
|
|
5. In PocketBase, at least one `quote_attachments` record references the
|
|
claimed `quotes` id (the attachment-linking path actually ran).
|
|
6. In PocketBase, at least one `quote_items` record references the
|
|
claimed `quotes` id with a non-empty `description` (the LLM
|
|
extraction actually produced something).
|
|
7. The test data the producer says they cleaned up is actually gone
|
|
(the test quote, its items, its attachment, and the auto-created
|
|
customer/company if any are no longer present in PB).
|
|
8. The 22 other inactive Quote Email Monitor workflow variants on the
|
|
instance are still present and untouched (count before/after — no
|
|
collateral damage).
|
|
|
|
If any check fails, return FAIL with the specific check that failed and
|
|
the evidence. If all 8 pass, return PASS with a one-line summary per
|
|
check. Do not invent evidence — if you cannot verify a check from the
|
|
APIs, say so and treat that as FAIL.
|
|
|
|
max_retries: 2
|