fix(agent): expose human input flag on executor

[fengjikui]

Summary

• add an AgentExecutor.ask_for_human_input property that delegates to AgentExecutorState
• keep the experimental executor compatible with ExecutorContext, whose human-input provider reads and writes the flag directly
• add regression coverage for direct state delegation and the sync human-input provider mutation path

Fixes #6065.

Testing

• uv run --package crewai --dev python -m pytest lib/crewai/tests/agents/test_agent_executor.py::TestAgentExecutor::test_ask_for_human_input_delegates_to_state lib/crewai/tests/agents/test_agent_executor.py::TestAgentExecutor::test_human_input_provider_can_update_executor_state_flag -q
• uv run --package crewai --dev ruff check lib/crewai/src/crewai/experimental/agent_executor.py lib/crewai/tests/agents/test_agent_executor.py
• git diff --check

I also ran the full lib/crewai/tests/agents/test_agent_executor.py file locally; it reached 76 passed, 13 failed. The failures were environment/extra dependency issues unrelated to this patch: local SOCKS proxy support missing socksio, missing crewai[anthropic], and missing crewai_tools.

This PR is AI-assisted and labeled llm-generated per the contribution guide.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Agent executor now provides a configurable option to request human feedback during agent execution, allowing dynamic control over human input prompts.

• Tests

  • Added comprehensive test coverage for human input functionality, validating that feedback requests can be toggled and that feedback processing correctly updates executor state.

[fengjikui]

I do not have permission to apply repository labels from this fork, but this PR is AI-assisted and should carry the required llm-generated label per the contribution guide.

[fengjikui]

Closing this duplicate in favor of #6069, which contains the same fix with stronger validation and already has the CodeRabbit review completed.

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

Pull request was closed or merged during review

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 414781e1-a7bf-4efc-855d-783ab2a7ef0d

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 913a3ab and 52f2faf.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• lib/crewai/src/crewai/experimental/agent_executor.py
• lib/crewai/tests/agents/test_agent_executor.py

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

AgentExecutor adds a public ask_for_human_input property with getter and setter that delegate to self._state.ask_for_human_input, enabling it to satisfy the ExecutorContext protocol. Test coverage validates property access and integration with SyncHumanInputProvider feedback handling.

Changes

Human Feedback Property on AgentExecutor

Layer / File(s)	Summary
ask_for_human_input property lib/crewai/src/crewai/experimental/agent_executor.py	AgentExecutor exposes ask_for_human_input as a public property with getter and setter that proxy to self._state.ask_for_human_input, satisfying the ExecutorContext protocol requirement.
Human input property tests lib/crewai/tests/agents/test_agent_executor.py	Added two test cases with required import: (1) property delegates to underlying state, (2) SyncHumanInputProvider can mutate executor state by clearing the flag after feedback processing.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 A whisper through the executor's door,
Human voices calling out once more,
A property flows, from state to sight,
Feedback loops now glowing bright!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The pull request title 'fix(agent): expose human input flag on executor' clearly and specifically describes the main change: exposing the ask_for_human_input property on AgentExecutor.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The changes fully address issue #6065 by adding the ask_for_human_input property getter/setter to AgentExecutor, satisfying ExecutorContext protocol requirements and enabling human-input handling.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are in scope: the property addition to AgentExecutor and test coverage for the new property and SyncHumanInputProvider interaction are directly related to fixing the issue.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Failed to replace (edit) comment. This is likely due to insufficient permissions or the comment being deleted.

Error details

{"name":"HttpError","status":500,"request":{"method":"PATCH","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/crewAIInc/crewAI/issues/comments/4647177657","headers":{"accept":"application/vnd.github.v3+json","user-agent":"octokit.js/0.0.0-development octokit-core.js/7.0.6 Node.js/24","authorization":"token [REDACTED]","content-type":"application/json; charset=utf-8"},"body":{"body":"<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: summarize by coderabbit.ai -->\n<!-- review_stack_entry_start -->\n\n[![Review Change Stack](https://storage.googleapis.com/coderabbit_public_assets/review-stack-in-coderabbit-ui.svg)](https://app.coderabbit.ai/change-stack/crewAIInc/crewAI/pull/6070?utm_source=github_walkthrough&utm_medium=github&utm_campaign=change_stack)\n\n<!-- review_stack_entry_end -->\n<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: review in progress by coderabbit.ai -->\n\n> [!NOTE]\n> Currently processing new changes in this PR. This may take a few minutes, please wait...\n> \n> <details>\n> <summary>⚙️ Run configuration</summary>\n> \n> **Configuration used**: Organization UI\n> \n> **Review profile**: CHILL\n> \n> **Plan**: Pro Plus\n> \n> **Run ID**: `414781e1-a7bf-4efc-855d-783ab2a7ef0d`\n> \n> </details>\n> \n> <details>\n> <summary>📥 Commits</summary>\n> \n> Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 913a3abeadb0491eb09f98af2f36082b67747b68 and 52f2faf5aa23ff66e900c989ab2f7343cf092f99.\n> \n> </details>\n> \n> <details>\n> <summary>📒 Files selected for processing (2)</summary>\n> \n> * `lib/crewai/src/crewai/experimental/agent_executor.py`\n> * `lib/crewai/tests/agents/test_agent_executor.py`\n> \n> </details>\n> \n> ```ascii\n>  ________________________________________________\n> < If this were a race, you'd still be importing. >\n>  ------------------------------------------------\n>   \\\n>    \\   (\\__/)\n>        (•ㅅ•)\n>        / 　 づ\n> ```\n\n<!-- end of auto-generated comment: review in progress by coderabbit.ai -->\n\n<!-- finishing_touch_checkbox_start -->\n\n<details>\n<summary>✨ Finishing Touches</summary>\n\n<details>\n<summary>🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)</summary>\n\n- [ ] <!-- {\"checkboxId\": \"f47ac10b-58cc-4372-a567-0e02b2c3d479\", \"radioGroupId\": \"utg-output-choice-group-unknown_comment_id\"} -->   Create PR with unit tests\n\n</details>\n\n</details>\n\n<!-- finishing_touch_checkbox_end -->\n<!-- tips_start -->\n\n---\n\nThanks for using [CodeRabbit](https://coderabbit.ai?utm_source=oss&utm_medium=github&utm_campaign=crewAIInc/crewAI&utm_content=6070)! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.\n\n<details>\n<summary>❤️ Share</summary>\n\n- [X](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A&url=https%3A//coderabbit.ai)\n- [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/share?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai)\n- [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/submit?title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&text=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A//coderabbit.ai)\n- [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai&mini=true&title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&summary=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code)\n\n</details>\n\n\n<sub>Comment `@coderabbitai help` to get the list of available commands and usage tips.</sub>\n\n<!-- tips_end -->"},"request":{"retryCount":3,"signal":{},"retries":3,"retryAfter":16}}}