refactor(agent-service): redesign sync-execution result and error model

[bobbai00]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

Restructures the per-operator summary the sync-execution backend returns and the agent-service / frontend consume, for a leaner, consistent wire contract. This is a focused re-do of #5927 cut directly from main (no foundation stack). Scope: only the type definitions of the execution result/error model — the wire contract across the Scala producer, the agent-service, and the frontend — plus the minimal consumer changes the new types force; no transport or formatting-logic changes.

• Replace the flat OperatorInfo with OperatorExecutionSummary (orthogonal sub-summaries: state, errorMessages, resultSummary?, consoleLogsSummary?); rename SyncExecutionResult → WorkflowExecutionSummary.
• resultSummary.sampleTuples is now SampleRow[] ({ rowIndex, tuple }) instead of JSON rows with an embedded __row_index__; drop the table-shape types (the agent derives input-port shapes from the DAG).
• Move WorkflowFatalError into types/execution.ts and reuse it for per-operator errors — the same type the workflow-compiling service returns for compilation errors, so compile and execution errors share one wire shape; api/compile-api.ts re-exports it so its existing importers are unchanged, and the frontend imports its existing declaration instead of adding a copy.
• errorMessages / errors are non-optional (empty = none); drop compilationErrors; collapse the console-message types and derive warnings from WARNING:-titled messages.
• Operator results are still pulled on demand via GET /agents/:id/operator-results (transport unchanged); that REST payload now carries the canonical OperatorExecutionSummary, and the frontend maps it to its flat display type (re-flattening sampleTuples so the display components are unchanged).

Touches the Scala producer (SyncExecutionResource, split into pure helpers with a new unit spec), the agent-service consumers (result-formatting, workflow-execution-tools, workflow-result-state, server), and the frontend mapping. Representation/type-level; the only behavior deltas are in the failure paths the new error type forces: one shared "operator failed" derivation (getOperatorErrorText), per-operator errors surfaced for any terminal state, a distinct "Compilation error:" label, and Killed preserved on timeout. Input-port shape lines are now derived rather than explicitly rendered.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #5750
Part of #5747.
Supersedes #5927.

How was this PR tested?

• agent-service: tsc --noEmit clean, bun test 134/134 pass, prettier --check clean.
• Scala: sbt WorkflowExecutionService/compile clean; the new SyncExecutionResourceSpec unit suite (no DB) passes 24/24, scalafmt applied. refactor(agent-service): redesign sync-execution result and error model #5927 verified the same wire shape via a full-stack end-to-end run (a Claude Haiku 4.5 agent built and executed a CSV workflow; /operator-results returned the new shape — resultSummary.sampleTuples: [{ rowIndex, tuple }], errorMessages: []).
• frontend: tsc --noEmit clean; targeted karma specs pass 22/22 (the new TestBed fixture renders the changed template); eslint clean.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context), Claude Fable 5

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• Contributors with relevant context: @Ma77Ball, @Yicong-Huang
  You can notify them by mentioning @Ma77Ball, @Yicong-Huang in a comment.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 89.54248% with 32 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 60.61%. Comparing base (5c4a963) to head (392f4de).
⚠️ Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...he/texera/web/resource/SyncExecutionResource.scala	76.74%	27 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...agent-interaction/agent-interaction.component.html	66.66%	0 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #6009      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     59.11%   60.61%   +1.50%     
- Complexity     3201     3232      +31     
============================================
  Files          1132     1133       +1     
  Lines         43681    43494     -187     
  Branches       4734     4717      -17     
============================================
+ Hits          25821    26365     +544     
+ Misses        16430    15682     -748     
- Partials       1430     1447      +17     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	70.00% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 5c4a963
agent-service	57.44% <100.00%> (+12.84%)	⬆️
amber	64.01% <76.74%> (+0.89%)	⬆️
computing-unit-managing-service	0.00% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 5c4a963
config-service	52.30% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 5c4a963
file-service	62.81% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 5c4a963
frontend	51.78% <96.15%> (+0.46%)	⬆️
notebook-migration-service	78.57% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 5c4a963
pyamber	91.19% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 5c4a963
workflow-compiling-service	55.14% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from 5c4a963

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 0 better · 🔴 7 worse · ⚪ 8 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main 6de8a48 benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🔴	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	414	0.253	23,639/33,453/33,453 us	🔴 +14.9% / 🔴 +120.9%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	923	0.563	107,304/138,820/138,820 us	🔴 +18.5% / 🔴 +28.6%
⚪	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	1,117	0.682	892,104/941,056/941,056 us	⚪ within ±5% / 🟢 -11.2%

Baseline details

Latest main 6de8a48 from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	414 tuples/sec	470 tuples/sec	776.36 tuples/sec	-11.9%	-46.7%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.253 MB/s	0.287 MB/s	0.474 MB/s	-11.8%	-46.6%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	23,639 us	21,484 us	12,636 us	+10.0%	+87.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	33,453 us	29,105 us	15,143 us	+14.9%	+120.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	33,453 us	29,105 us	18,954 us	+14.9%	+76.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	923 tuples/sec	967 tuples/sec	985.33 tuples/sec	-4.6%	-6.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.563 MB/s	0.59 MB/s	0.601 MB/s	-4.6%	-6.4%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	107,304 us	103,010 us	101,671 us	+4.2%	+5.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	138,820 us	117,171 us	107,939 us	+18.5%	+28.6%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	138,820 us	117,171 us	113,798 us	+18.5%	+22.0%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	1,117 tuples/sec	1,100 tuples/sec	1,016 tuples/sec	+1.5%	+9.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.682 MB/s	0.671 MB/s	0.62 MB/s	+1.6%	+9.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	892,104 us	916,304 us	989,693 us	-2.6%	-9.9%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	941,056 us	980,009 us	1,028,327 us	-4.0%	-8.5%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	941,056 us	980,009 us	1,059,969 us	-4.0%	-11.2%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,482.81,200,128000,414,0.253,23639.13,33453.15,33453.15
1,100,10,64,20,2167.76,2000,1280000,923,0.563,107303.81,138820.05,138820.05
2,1000,10,64,20,17904.21,20000,12800000,1117,0.682,892104.14,941056.45,941056.45