fix(interactions): add queued to the Interaction status enum

[yuneng-berri]

Relevant issues

Linear ticket

Pre-Submission checklist

Please complete all items before asking a LiteLLM maintainer to review your PR

• I have added meaningful tests
• My PR passes all CI/CD checks (e.g., lint, format, unit tests)
• My PR's scope is as isolated as possible; it only solves 1 specific problem
• I have received a Greptile Confidence Score of at least 4/5 before requesting a maintainer review (Greptile reviews automatically once the PR is opened; only comment @greptileai to re-request a review after pushing changes)

Delays in PR merge?

If you're seeing a delay in your PR being merged, ping the LiteLLM Team on Slack (#pr-review).

Screenshots / Proof of Fix

The user-facing surface here is Google's published spec, so the proof is a live fetch of it rather than an LLM call; no proxy request is involved in what broke

Before, at 212a9213c4 (staging tip); the live spec already carries the new value, so the canary fails on every open PR:

$ curl -s https://ai.google.dev/static/api/interactions.openapi.json \
  | python3 -c "import json,sys; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['components']['schemas']['Interaction']['properties']['status']['enum'])"
['in_progress', 'requires_action', 'completed', 'failed', 'cancelled', 'incomplete', 'budget_exceeded', 'queued']

$ python -m pytest tests/test_litellm/interactions/test_openapi_compliance.py -q
E       AssertionError: assert ['in_progress...omplete', ...] == ['in_progress...omplete', ...]
E         Left contains one more item: 'queued'
1 failed, 12 passed in 0.58s

Google's own description for the new value, from the same fetch:

"The interaction is queued, waiting for processing."

After, at 6c31aab6f2:

$ python -m pytest tests/test_litellm/interactions/test_openapi_compliance.py -q
13 passed in 0.43s

Type

✅ Test

Changes

Google added a queued value to Interaction.status in the live Interactions OpenAPI spec, which test_status_enum_values fetches at test time and asserts exact equality against, so the assertion started failing on every open PR in the repo

That exact-match assertion is deliberate; it is how we find out the spec moved. So this adds the new value to the expected list instead of loosening the check to a subset comparison, same as the previous spec drifts in #21943, #27432 and #30986

The queued value is also mirrored into the two generated Status enums that track the spec, one of which is exported as InteractionStatus. There is no runtime behavior change: InteractionsAPIResponse.status is a plain Optional[str], so a queued status from Google already parsed fine

Final Attestation

• The tests check the right things, including the edge cases, and regressions in the respective real-world customer use-cases are not possible after this PR

[greptile-apps]

Greptile Summary

This PR adds the new queued interaction status. The main changes are:

• Adds queued to both generated status enums
• Updates the strict OpenAPI compliance expectation

Confidence Score: 5/5

This looks safe to merge.

• No blocking issues found in the changed code.

Important Files Changed

Filename	Overview
litellm/types/interactions/generated.py	Adds the queued wire value to both generated interaction status enums while preserving their existing member naming conventions
tests/test_litellm/interactions/test_openapi_compliance.py	Adds queued to the exact expected status list without weakening the compliance assertion

_{Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/lit..." | Re-trigger Greptile}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 31 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing litellm_/status-enum-values-test-042481 (6c31aab) with litellm_internal_staging (212a921)¹}

Footnotes

1. No successful run was found on litellm_internal_staging (01d624e) during the generation of this report, so 212a921 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩