test: unit tests for task queue (priority, retry, dead letter)

[Kaycee276]

Title

test: unit tests for task queue (priority, retry, dead letter)

Context

PR #178 introduced a task queue with priority ordering, a dead-letter queue, and retry logic with backoff, but it did not include tests or fully expose the dequeue(), peekNext(), and retryAll() methods. This PR fulfills the acceptance criteria for issue #186 by implementing the missing methods and writing comprehensive unit tests.

Implementation Details

• Added peekNext() to lib/agent-runtime/task-queue.ts: Retrieves the highest-priority pending task without modifying its state.
• Added dequeue() to lib/agent-runtime/task-queue.ts: Uses peekNext() to get the next task and transitions its status to "leased".
• Added retryAll() to lib/agent-runtime/task-queue.ts: Iterates over the dead-letter queue and calls retryDeadLetterTask() on all failed tasks.
• Added Test Suite at lib/task-queue/__tests__/task-queue.test.ts:
  • Enqueues multiple priority levels to assert descending priority dequeue.
  • Tests equal priorities to ensure FIFO ordering.
  • Uses vi.useFakeTimers() to fast-forward through the N retry attempts and verify the task eventually moves to the dead-letter queue.
  • Verifies retryAll() accurately resets dead-letter tasks back to pending.
  • Asserts that dequeue() on an empty queue safely returns null.
  • Mocks Request objects to test both the POST /api/tasks and GET /api/tasks/[id] Next.js route handlers directly.

Verification

• Unit tests verify all 8 required behaviors using Vitest.
• Re-ran the existing suite to ensure no regressions were introduced to enqueueTask, failTask, or API routes.
• Proof: (Please remember to attach your demo video or screenshots here as per the mandatory delivery requirements before opening the PR)

closes #186

[leocagli]

Hi @Kaycee276 👋 — the tests themselves look good (+158, clean diff, Sonar green), but the required CI fails at npm ci with ERESOLVE: your branch's lockfile resolves typescript@7.0.2, which conflicts with @typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin@8.64.x (requires TS <7). main is on typescript@5.7.3 and its CI is green.

Fix: rebase your branch onto the latest main (make sure your fork's main is synced first) and don't carry over package.json/package-lock.json changes — your PR shouldn't need any. Once CI is green I'll merge right away. 🙏

[Kaycee276]

Hi @leocagli
Thanks for the review! 🙏

I've pushed an update that addresses your feedback:

• Reverted the package.json and lockfile changes so they are now perfectly in sync with main (no more ESLint vs TypeScript 7.0 ERESOLVE conflicts).
• Fixed the TS1005 syntax error in lib/agent-runtime/task-queue.ts that occurred during my previous conflict resolution.

The CI should be completely green now. Let me know if anything else is needed!

[leocagli]

Hi @Kaycee276 👋 — quick update: video/screenshots are not required to merge anymore, just a bonus — if you add one it'll be considered for GrantFox rewards on this issue. So I'll review this on code + checks alone now. 🙏

[leocagli]

Needs a rebase — and that is our fault, not yours

We just merged a batch of PRs that had been waiting far too long for review. Yours was in that batch and was green, but the merges ahead of it touched overlapping files, so this branch now conflicts with main.

To get it in:

git fetch origin
git rebase origin/main
# resolve conflicts, then
git push --force-with-lease

Once CI goes green again, comment here and it gets merged — no second review round needed for the parts that were already approved.

Sorry for the churn. The delay that caused this was on our side: this PR sat for weeks while other work landed on top of it.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
2 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