feat: add run_id to telemetry payloads

[ogabrielluiz]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Each flow, chat retrieval, and playground run now gets a unique run ID for easier tracking across logs and telemetry.
  • Vertices order responses now include the run ID, enabling end-to-end correlation.
  • Webhook and background task executions propagate the run ID for consistent observability.

• Chores

  • Telemetry payloads updated to carry run IDs for runs, playground, and components, with consistent reporting on both success and error paths.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto incremental reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Walkthrough

Adds a run_id across build, chat, endpoints, and OpenAI response paths. Propagates run_id through Graph (via set_run_id), telemetry payloads (RunPayload, PlaygroundPayload, ComponentPayload), and responses. Updates function signatures to accept/pass run_id and extends telemetry schemas with new optional IDs.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Telemetry schema extensions src/backend/base/langflow/services/telemetry/schema.py	Added optional identifiers with serialization aliases: RunPayload.run_id, PlaygroundPayload.playground_run_id, ComponentPayload.component_run_id.
Build API run_id propagation src/backend/base/langflow/api/build.py	Generates run_id per build, assigns to Graph (set_run_id), and includes it in PlaygroundPayload and per-component ComponentPayload on success/error paths.
Chat retrieve flow run_id propagation src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/chat.py	Generates run_id for retrieve_vertices_order, assigns to Graph, returns in VerticesOrderResponse, and includes in PlaygroundPayload and ComponentPayload for success/error.
Endpoints run_id threading and telemetry src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/endpoints.py	simple_run_flow now accepts optional run_id; background task accepts telemetry_service, start_time, run_id; on_disconnect/webhook paths create/forward run_id; RunPayload includes run_id on success/error.
OpenAI responses telemetry update src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/openai_responses.py	Adds run_id=None to RunPayload on success and exception paths; no control-flow changes.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
  autonumber
  participant Client
  participant API as Endpoints
  participant Graph
  participant Worker as Background Task
  participant Telemetry

  Note over API,Graph: Flow run (non-webhook)
  Client->>API: simple_run_flow(request)
  API->>API: run_id = uuid() if None
  API->>Graph: set_run_id(run_id)
  alt stream=false
    API->>Graph: execute(...)
    Graph-->>API: result or error
    API->>Telemetry: RunPayload{run_id, status}
    API-->>Client: response
  else stream=true (background)
    API->>Worker: simple_run_flow_task(..., run_id)
    Worker->>Graph: execute(...)
    alt success
      Worker->>Telemetry: RunPayload{run_id, status=success}
    else error
      Worker->>Telemetry: RunPayload{run_id, status=error}
    end
    API-->>Client: accepted/stream handle
  end

Loading

sequenceDiagram
  autonumber
  participant Caller
  participant BuildAPI as build.py
  participant ChatAPI as v1/chat.py
  participant Graph
  participant Telemetry

  Note over BuildAPI,Graph: Build graph and order vertices
  Caller->>BuildAPI: build_graph_and_get_order()
  BuildAPI->>BuildAPI: run_id = uuid()
  BuildAPI->>Graph: set_run_id(run_id)
  BuildAPI->>Graph: construct/build
  alt per-component success/error
    Graph-->>BuildAPI: component result/error
    BuildAPI->>Telemetry: ComponentPayload{component_run_id=run_id}
  end
  BuildAPI->>Telemetry: PlaygroundPayload{playground_run_id=run_id, status}
  BuildAPI-->>Caller: order

  Note over ChatAPI,Graph: Retrieve vertices order
  Caller->>ChatAPI: retrieve_vertices_order()
  ChatAPI->>ChatAPI: run_id = uuid()
  ChatAPI->>Graph: set_run_id(run_id)
  ChatAPI->>Graph: plan/retrieve
  ChatAPI->>Telemetry: PlaygroundPayload{playground_run_id=run_id, status}
  ChatAPI-->>Caller: VerticesOrderResponse{run_id}

Loading

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 error, 2 warnings, 1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Test Coverage For New Implementations	❌ Error	I inspected the PR diff and no backend test files named test_*.py or frontend *.test.ts files were added or modified, so the new run_id telemetry functionality lacks accompanying tests; without verification that the run_id propagation is exercised, the PR fails the coverage expectations for new features.	Please add tests that validate run_id propagation through the telemetry payloads (e.g., ensuring RunPayload, PlaygroundPayload, and ComponentPayload receive the run_id during flow execution) using the project’s standard test naming conventions, and re-run this check after including them.
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 66.67% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	You can run @coderabbitai generate docstrings to improve docstring coverage.
Test Quality And Coverage	⚠️ Warning	No tests were added or updated to cover the new run_id telemetry functionality introduced across the flow build, chat, and API endpoint paths, so there is no verification that the success and failure telemetry payloads now populated with run identifiers behave as expected; consequently the main new behavior remains untested.	Please add backend pytest coverage that exercises the updated flow building, chat retrieval, and API execution paths, asserting that telemetry payloads include the expected run_id in both success and error scenarios before resubmitting.
Test File Naming And Structure	❓ Inconclusive	No test files were modified in this pull request, and I found no indications that new tests were added elsewhere; as a result, I cannot verify naming patterns, structure, or coverage against the stated criteria. Without relevant test artifacts to inspect, the requirements for confirming proper organization, descriptive naming, and scenario coverage remain unmet. Consequently, there is insufficient evidence to determine compliance with the custom check.	Please add or reference the relevant test files so their naming, structure, and coverage can be evaluated; once those tests are available, I can re-run the check to confirm they adhere to the required conventions.

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title Check	✅ Passed	The title succinctly summarizes the main change by indicating that a run_id telemetry field is added to payloads, which aligns with the introduced modifications across multiple API and schema files.
Excessive Mock Usage Warning	✅ Passed	No test files were added or modified in this pull request, so there is no evidence of mock-heavy testing that could obscure real behavior or misuse core-logic mocks; consequently, there are no indications that additional integration coverage is required.

---

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.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 68.18182% with 14 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 24.80%. Comparing base (9570711) to head (1cb5d1c).
⚠️ Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/endpoints.py	70.96%	9 Missing ⚠️
src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/chat.py	33.33%	4 Missing ⚠️
src/backend/base/langflow/api/build.py	75.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

❌ Your project status has failed because the head coverage (48.63%) is below the target coverage (55.00%). You can increase the head coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #10105      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   24.73%   24.80%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files        1090     1087       -3     
  Lines       40116    40032      -84     
  Branches     5550     5524      -26     
==========================================
+ Hits         9921     9929       +8     
+ Misses      30024    29932      -92     
  Partials      171      171              

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	48.63% <68.18%> (+0.03%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...c/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/openai_responses.py	13.24% <ø> (ø)
...backend/base/langflow/services/telemetry/schema.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/backend/base/langflow/api/build.py	64.01% <75.00%> (+0.27%)	⬆️
src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/chat.py	37.02% <33.33%> (-0.10%)	⬇️
src/backend/base/langflow/api/v1/endpoints.py	61.41% <70.96%> (+0.81%)	⬆️

... and 25 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[erichare]

NIT: Maybe we can import uuid and use uuid.uuid4() as is done in the rest of the PR, just for consistency? (hardly matters, but might look cleaner)

[edwinjosechittilappilly]

I agree with this too

[erichare]

LGTM! Awesome addition

[edwinjosechittilappilly]

LGTM

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud