feat(agents-api): Add some LiteLLM exceptions to the list of non-retryable errors

[HamadaSalhab]

Added the following exceptions:

• litellm.exceptions.NotFoundError.
• litellm.exceptions.InvalidRequestError.
• litellm.exceptions.AuthenticationError.
• litellm.exceptions.ServiceUnavailableError.
• litellm.exceptions.OpenAIError.
• litellm.exceptions.APIError.

---

Important

Add LiteLLM exceptions to non-retryable errors in tasks.py.

• Exceptions:
  • Added litellm.exceptions.NotFoundError, InvalidRequestError, AuthenticationError, ServiceUnavailableError, OpenAIError, and APIError to NON_RETRYABLE_ERROR_TYPES in tasks.py.

^{This description was created by for 018360c. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[ellipsis-dev]

👍 Looks good to me! Reviewed everything up to 018360c in 16 seconds

More details

• Looked at 40 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. agents-api/agents_api/common/exceptions/tasks.py:99

• Draft comment:
  ServiceUnavailableError is typically a retryable error, as it might indicate a temporary issue. Consider if this should be non-retryable.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable:
  The comment is speculative, suggesting a reconsideration of the classification of ServiceUnavailableError. However, the file's purpose is to define non-retryable errors, and the inclusion of ServiceUnavailableError seems intentional. The comment does not provide strong evidence that a change is required, as it is based on a typical scenario rather than a definite issue.
  I might be overlooking the possibility that ServiceUnavailableError is commonly considered retryable in other contexts, which could justify the comment. However, without strong evidence or a clear mandate to change the classification, the comment remains speculative.
  The comment lacks strong evidence and is speculative, which does not align with the rules for review comments. It suggests a reconsideration without a definitive need for change.
  The comment should be deleted as it is speculative and does not provide strong evidence for a required code change.

Workflow ID: wflow_jgKYGnUxagzMCe6V

---

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.