feat: Add preset_metadata JSON field to Automation model

[malhotra5]

Summary

Adds a generic preset_metadata JSON column to the Automation model that stores preset-specific configuration for UI consumption. This follows up on the repository support work and allows the UI to display automation configuration without needing to inspect tarball contents.

Closes #56

Changes

Model Changes

• automation/models.py: Added preset_metadata: Mapped[dict | None] JSON column (nullable)

Schema Changes

• automation/schemas.py: Added preset_metadata: dict | None to AutomationResponse

Endpoint Changes

• automation/preset_router.py:
  • Prompt preset endpoint now populates preset_metadata with:
    • preset_type: "prompt"
    • prompt: the user's prompt text
    • repos: (optional) repository configuration when repos are specified
  • Plugin preset endpoint now populates preset_metadata with:
    • preset_type: "plugin"
    • prompt: the user's prompt text
    • plugins: list of plugin source configurations
    • repos: (optional) repository configuration when repos are specified

Migration

• migrations/versions/005_add_preset_metadata_column.py: Adds the preset_metadata JSON column

Tests

• tests/test_preset_router.py: Added TestPresetMetadata class with 5 comprehensive tests:
  • test_prompt_preset_sets_preset_metadata
  • test_prompt_preset_with_repos_includes_repos_in_metadata
  • test_plugin_preset_sets_preset_metadata
  • test_plugin_preset_with_repos_includes_repos_in_metadata
  • test_preset_metadata_stored_in_database

Metadata Schema

{
  "preset_type": "prompt" | "plugin",
  "prompt": "...",
  "plugins": [{"source": "github:owner/repo", "ref": "v1.0.0"}],
  "repos": [{"url": "OpenHands/repo", "ref": "main"}]
}

• Prompt presets: preset_type, prompt, repos (when specified)
• Plugin presets: preset_type, prompt, plugins, repos (when specified)
• Custom SDK automations: preset_metadata = NULL

Design Decision: sa.JSON vs JSONB

This field uses sa.JSON instead of PostgreSQL-specific JSONB to support potential future SQLite compatibility. Existing fields (trigger, event_payload) still use JSONB as they were created before this requirement.

Testing

All unit tests pass. Integration tests require Docker (skipped in this environment but should pass in CI).

---

This PR was created by an AI agent (OpenHands) on behalf of the user.

[github-actions]

Coverage Report

File	Stmts	Miss	Cover	Missing
__init__.py	1	0	100%
app.py	118	59	50%	36, 39, 42, 48, 50, 53, 56–59, 62–63, 66, 73–74, 77–78, 82, 90–91, 94, 101–102, 104, 107–108, 111, 116–124, 126–128, 214–216, 221–222, 224–225, 227, 230–232, 234–235, 237–238, 243–244, 248, 251, 253
auth.py	116	5	95%	80, 122, 286, 294–295
config.py	146	0	100%
constants.py	16	0	100%
db.py	44	26	40%	37–39, 48–49, 51–52, 54, 62, 69, 79, 82–83, 87–88, 96, 104, 109, 114, 117–123
dispatcher.py	139	35	74%	53, 65, 67–68, 137, 141, 163, 171, 190–192, 220–222, 225–227, 280–281, 305–312, 328, 341–342, 355–356, 363–364, 366
event_router.py	59	19	67%	83, 88, 119–121, 137–138, 156, 158, 160–161, 163, 173, 179–181, 184, 186, 188
exceptions.py	4	0	100%
execution.py	244	147	39%	36–38, 73–76, 84–88, 90, 98–100, 105–109, 111, 125–128, 130, 132, 134–137, 139–144, 146, 148–155, 157–158, 160, 196–198, 204–206, 217–220, 226–228, 268–272, 281, 289, 293, 295–296, 301–302, 307, 359, 361, 379, 382–385, 405–408, 410, 418–419, 422, 428, 491–493, 495–501, 504–505, 507, 509–511, 514, 517, 520–523, 525, 528–529, 532–534, 538–539, 543–546, 548, 556–557, 561–563, 565–571, 575, 577, 586–588, 590–592
filter_eval.py	50	2	96%	161–162
logger.py	55	17	69%	37, 50–51, 53–59, 74, 77, 101, 103–106
models.py	81	0	100%
preset_router.py	188	58	69%	126, 234–235, 240–247, 252, 255, 258, 262–263, 265–266, 278–281, 283–287, 292, 301, 364, 475–476, 481–488, 493, 496, 499, 504–505, 507–508, 520–523, 525–529, 534, 544
router.py	113	64	43%	74–75, 95, 97, 100, 102, 116, 129, 131–132, 134–135, 138–140, 151–153, 171–174, 193, 196, 199, 206, 208, 237, 242–244, 247–249, 253–254, 259, 263–266, 268, 276, 278–279, 284–285, 288, 290, 292–294, 297–300, 305, 307–308, 317, 338–340, 344
scheduler.py	57	9	84%	124–125, 162–163, 178–179, 189–190, 192
schemas.py	266	17	93%	31, 165, 171–173, 232–234, 236, 319–320, 323, 328, 333, 477, 485, 492
trigger_matcher.py	28	3	89%	72–74
uploads.py	107	59	44%	138–141, 149–151, 157–158, 161, 170–171, 174–175, 183–184, 186–189, 192–195, 197, 199–201, 203–206, 208–209, 211, 226, 232–233, 236, 239, 242, 245, 247, 260–261, 275, 278–280, 282–283, 285, 291–292, 305, 313–315, 319
watchdog.py	100	47	53%	50–51, 63–64, 69–71, 83–84, 228–229, 231, 233, 242, 244–246, 248, 255–257, 259–261, 263–264, 266, 281, 283, 288–291, 293–298, 300–306, 308
webhook_router.py	80	48	40%	57, 82–83, 107–108, 110, 113–114, 116, 126, 128–132, 137, 139, 151, 154, 157, 164–165, 167, 180, 182–183, 188, 204, 206–207, 213–215, 217–218, 220, 235, 237–238, 243–244, 261, 263–264, 270–271, 273, 275
event_schemas
__init__.py	29	1	96%	53
custom.py	33	5	84%	52–53, 64–66
detection.py	32	0	100%
github.py	125	4	96%	306, 311, 456, 483
presets
__init__.py	0	0	100%
storage
__init__.py	5	0	100%
factory.py	11	1	90%	29
file_store.py	22	5	77%	21, 30, 35, 40, 64
google_cloud.py	72	11	84%	49, 97–102, 136–137, 190, 192
s3.py	112	15	86%	56, 100, 102–103, 107, 109, 190, 213–215, 269–270, 275, 337–338
utils
__init__.py	5	0	100%
api_key.py	32	24	25%	40–41, 46–48, 50, 55, 60, 62–65, 67–68, 70–71, 73, 79, 81–82, 89, 91–92, 98
cron.py	45	6	86%	39, 45, 74, 80, 123, 140
log_context.py	10	0	100%
run.py	77	12	84%	74–76, 175–177, 182–184, 231, 237–238
sandbox.py	101	76	24%	40–41, 46–49, 51–53, 55–61, 73, 75, 85–86, 88–90, 92–93, 96–97, 103, 109–111, 121–122, 127–133, 156–157, 159–163, 165–169, 206–207, 209, 211–214, 219–220, 223, 225–226, 232–234, 239–241, 246–247, 255–257, 259
tarball_validation.py	48	0	100%
time.py	3	0	100%
webhook.py	51	16	68%	46, 51, 119, 129–131, 137, 174, 177–183, 189
TOTAL	2825	791	72%

[github-actions]

🚀 Deploy Preview PR Created/Updated

A deploy preview has been created/updated for this PR.

Deploy PR: https://github.com/OpenHands/deploy/pull/3996
Automation SHA: 5d18ea70710e0bd7b057035a31c5a6c3d51f20f2
Last updated: Apr 30, 2026, 11:12:53 AM ET

Once the deploy PR's CI passes, the automation service will be deployed to the feature environment.

[all-hands-bot]

🟡 Acceptable with fixes - Good structure and comprehensive tests, but needs one critical fix for type consistency.

Verdict: ❌ Needs rework - Fix the JSON→JSONB type inconsistency before merging.

Key Insight: Using JSON instead of JSONB contradicts the PR description, breaks consistency with existing fields, and sacrifices PostgreSQL-specific performance benefits.

[all-hands-bot]

[RISK ASSESSMENT]

• [Overall PR] ⚠️ Risk Assessment: 🟡 MEDIUM

The PR is additive and backward-compatible (nullable field), with good test coverage. However, the JSON vs JSONB type inconsistency could cause issues:

• Performance impact: JSON stores text, JSONB stores binary - queries on this field will be slower than expected
• Indexing limitations: JSONB supports GIN indexes for fast queries; JSON does not
• Inconsistency risk: Different behavior than other JSON fields in the schema

Once the type is corrected to JSONB, this becomes LOW risk.

---

Improve this review? If any feedback above seems incorrect or irrelevant to this repository, you can teach the reviewer to do better:

1. Add a .agents/skills/custom-codereview-guide.md file to your branch (or edit it if one already exists) with the /codereview trigger and the context the reviewer is missing (e.g., "Security concerns about X do not apply here because Y"). See the customization docs for the required frontmatter format.
2. Re-request a review - the reviewer reads guidelines from the PR branch, so your changes take effect immediately.
3. When your PR is merged, the guideline file goes through normal code review by repository maintainers.

Resolve with AI? Install the iterate skill in your agent and run /iterate to automatically drive this PR through CI, review, and QA until it's merge-ready.

[malhotra5]

Addressed review feedback — the use of sa.JSON instead of JSONB is intentional per maintainer request for future SQLite compatibility. Resolved all threads with explanations. Ready for another review.

[all-hands-bot]

🟢 Good taste - Clean, pragmatic implementation that solves a real problem.

The preset_metadata field provides the UI with structured configuration data without requiring tarball inspection. Implementation is straightforward: nullable JSONB column, populated by preset endpoints, comprehensive tests covering all scenarios.

The intentional use of sa.JSON (vs JSONB for older fields) maintains SQLite compatibility per maintainer guidance from resolved review threads.

[RISK ASSESSMENT]

• [Overall PR] ⚠️ Risk Assessment: 🟢 LOW

Adds a nullable column with no breaking changes. Only affects preset endpoints. Comprehensive test coverage verifies metadata population and database persistence. Safe migration strategy (nullable column compatible with existing records).

VERDICT:
✅ Worth merging - Simple, well-tested addition that enables UI functionality.

KEY INSIGHT:
Storing preset metadata alongside the automation eliminates the need for UI to parse tarballs, enabling instant configuration display—a pragmatic separation of runtime artifacts from UI state.