Error handling using Oauth feature

[Suvam-paul145]

Problem Description

The repository needed an initial structured plan and improved reliability in the workflow related to error handling and project initialization. Without a defined plan and proper error handling strategy, development processes may become inconsistent and difficult to maintain.

Why It Matters

• Lack of an initial planning structure can make future development and collaboration difficult.
• Missing or unclear error-handling strategies can lead to runtime failures that are harder to debug.
• Establishing a clear base structure ensures contributors understand the intended workflow.

Solution (Method Used)

The following approach was used to address the problem:

1. Introduced an initial project planning commit to establish the development direction.
2. Integrated error handling improvements through a merged branch.
3. Ensured that the changes can be automatically merged with the main branch without conflicts.
4. Maintained compatibility with the existing codebase.

This ensures that the repository now has a clearer development baseline and improved reliability in handling potential errors.

What Changed

• Added an initial development plan commit.
• Merged updates from the copilot/add-error-handling branch.
• Prepared the repository for further structured development.

What Did NOT Change (Scope Boundary)

• No new features were introduced.
• No API endpoints were modified.
• No storage or scheduler backends were changed.
• No authentication or authorization logic was modified.

---

Change Type

• Bug fix
• Feature
• Refactor
• Documentation
• Security hardening
• Tests
• Chore/infra

---

Scope (Touched Areas)

• Server / API endpoints
• Extensions (DID, x402, etc.)
• Storage backends
• Scheduler backends
• Observability / monitoring
• Authentication / authorization
• CLI / utilities
• Tests
• Documentation
• CI/CD / infra

---

Linked Issue / PR

• Closes #
• Related Bump pypa/gh-action-pypi-publish from 1.4.2 to 1.12.4 #2

---

User-Visible / Behavior Changes

None

---

Security Impact

• New permissions/capabilities? No
• Secrets/credentials handling changed? No
• New/changed network calls? No
• Database schema/migration changes? No
• Authentication/authorization changes? No

---

closes #295

Verification

Environment

• OS: Linux
• Python version: 3.x
• Storage backend: Default project configuration
• Scheduler backend: Default project configuration

Steps to Test

1. Pull the branch 295.
2. Review the commit history.
3. Confirm the merge of the error-handling branch and initial planning commit.

Expected Behavior

• Repository contains the new planning commit.
• Error handling related updates are merged without conflicts.

Actual Behavior

• Changes merged successfully and branch is ready for integration.

---

Evidence

• Failing test before + passing after
• Commit history showing merged updates
• Screenshot / recording
• Performance metrics (if relevant)

---

Human Verification

Verified scenarios

• Confirmed that the pull request merges cleanly with the main branch.
• Reviewed commit history and branch comparison.

Edge cases checked

• Merge conflict verification.

What was NOT verified

• Runtime error-handling behavior (no runtime logic changes were executed).

---

Compatibility / Migration

• Backward compatible? Yes
• Config/env changes? No
• Database migration needed? No

---

Failure Recovery

How to revert

git revert <commit-hash>

[Copilot]

Copilot wasn't able to review any files in this pull request.

[Suvam-paul145]

@Paraschamoli review my code