fix(backend): Fix iteration and timer block

[majdyz]

Background

Improvement on the Step Through Items & Timer block.

Changes 🏗️

• Avoid mixing data types for items input on Step Through Items block.
• Make input pins on CountDownTimer block non-advanced.

Testing 🔍

Note

Only for the new autogpt platform, currently in autogpt_platform/

• Create from scratch and execute an agent with at least 3 blocks
• Import an agent from file upload, and confirm it executes correctly
• Upload agent to marketplace
• Import an agent from marketplace and confirm it executes correctly
• Edit an agent from monitor, and confirm it executes correctly

Configuration Changes 📝

Note

Only for the new autogpt platform, currently in autogpt_platform/

If you're making configuration or infrastructure changes, please remember to check you've updated the related infrastructure code in the autogpt_platform/infra folder.

Examples of such changes might include:

• Changing ports
• Adding new services that need to communicate with each other
• Secrets or environment variable changes
• New or infrastructure changes such as databases

[qodo-merge-pro]

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

Here are some key observations to aid the review process:

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 4 🔵🔵🔵🔵⚪

🧪 PR contains tests

🔒 No security concerns identified

⚡ Recommended focus areas for review Code Duplication The StepThroughItemsBlock has three redundant input fields (items, items_object, items_str) that serve the same purpose. This increases complexity and maintenance burden. Validation Gap Output validation is skipped for non-standard blocks, which could lead to invalid data propagating through the system. Error Handling The error handling in add_execution() could be improved by using more specific exception types instead of generic ValueError.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for auto-gpt-docs canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	12bd53f
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/auto-gpt-docs/deploys/673c058f4227ed00085e3add

[ntindle]

I agree with the changes here, but we need to figure out migration routes for these type of changes in general. Can you check the marketplace for these being used? if not problematic, feel free to merge

[majdyz]

@ntindle good point, I don't see it being used at all in the marketplace, but I can see some historical graphs using it. So I reverted the breaking change.

[Torantulino]

Is this compatible with loading graphs that have the old version of the block in it now?
Since you've (just) added inputs I wonder whether it will break the graphs or not.

Nick is right that we need to not break blocks until we implement block versioning.

[majdyz]

The added input is not mandatory, so it's not going to break the old block

[majdyz]

The only case that it might break is if there is a graph that uses item input but as str not as list

[majdyz]

Superseded by: #8713