affaan-m/ECC · error · SavedWorkflowClaimError

record for provider claims saved workflow state; a local…

Error message

record for provider {record.get('provider')!r} claims saved workflow state; a local reference is never a saved provider workflow

What it means

assert_no_saved_provider_workflow enforces TasteForge's provenance guarantee that records describe only local references, never persisted provider workflow state. If any record's 'persisted_workflow_state' key is truthy it raises SavedWorkflowClaimError naming the offending provider, since a local reference can never constitute a saved provider workflow.

Solutions

Remove the persisted_workflow_state field from the offending record and re-run validation
Regenerate the records through TasteForge's offline workflow so they contain only local references
Investigate the producer of the record — the claim indicates a non-offline provenance chain that must not be trusted

Example fix

// before
records[0]["persisted_workflow_state"] = {"run_id": "abc"}
assert_no_saved_provider_workflow(records)  # raises
// after
records[0].pop("persisted_workflow_state", None)
assert_no_saved_provider_workflow(records)  # passes

Defensive patterns

Strategy: try-catch

Validate before calling

bad = [r.get('provider') for r in records if r.get('persisted_workflow_state')]
assert not bad, f"records claim saved provider state: {bad}"

Try / catch

try:
    assert_no_saved_provider_workflow(records)
except SavedWorkflowClaimError as e:
    log.error("Untrusted provenance record: %s", e)
    records = [r for r in records if not r.get("persisted_workflow_state")]

Prevention

Never hand-edit provenance records to add workflow state
Validate records produced by external tools before importing
Treat persisted_workflow_state as a tamper signal, not data

When it happens

Trigger: Calling assert_no_saved_provider_workflow(records) where at least one dict contains persisted_workflow_state set to a truthy value (True, a non-empty dict/string) — typically records produced by an external tool or hand-edited provenance file.

Common situations: Importing provenance exported by another (networked) tool; hand-editing records.json and adding workflow state; a third-party integration writing extra fields; schema drift after upgrading from a different pipeline.

Understand the failure class

Background: Schema validation failed / invalid input schema: payload rejected because its shape doesn't match the expected schema — this error's family across 28 libraries.

Related errors

AI-assisted analysis of affaan-m/ECC@8321021c54 (2026-09-16). Data as JSON: /api/errors/9a4e3740c18d05b8. Report an issue: GitHub.

Appendix: source

Thrown at skills/taste-application/scripts/tasteforge/provenance.py:145

    Constructed so that no field can be misread as \"a Fal workflow was
    saved\": the record is explicitly ``reference_only`` and denies both
    persisted provider state and execution authority.
    """
    return {
        "kind": "provider-workflow-reference",
        "provider": provider,
        "reference_only": True,
        "persisted_workflow_state": False,
        "authorizes_execution": False,
    }


def assert_no_saved_provider_workflow(records: list[dict[str, Any]]) -> None:
    """Raise if any record claims persisted provider workflow state."""
    for record in records:
        if record.get("persisted_workflow_state"):
            raise SavedWorkflowClaimError(
                f"record for provider {record.get('provider')!r} claims saved "
                "workflow state; a local reference is never a saved provider "
                "workflow"
            )

View on GitHub (pinned to 8321021c54)