fix(ai): remove itemId from providerOptions for openai models

[bhuvaneshprasad]

Fix DurableAgent + OpenAI Responses API failing on tool calls due to missing required reasoning item. The issue occurred because tool calls were forwarding itemId in providerMetadata, which requires a paired reasoning item that DurableAgent doesn't provide.

Changes:

• Remove itemId from tool call providerMetadata
• Add previousResponseId tracking for proper conversation continuity
• Extract responseId from finish chunk and pass it in subsequent requests

The previousResponseId approach is sufficient for conversation continuity and avoids the duplicate item error that occurs when both previousResponseId and itemId are present.

Fixes #880

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: fbcd78a

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[vercel]

@bhuvaneshprasad is attempting to deploy a commit to the Vercel Labs Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[VaguelySerious]

Hi @bhuvaneshprasad, thanks for contributing! We're just now catching up on community PRs. Could you:

• Add a changeset to this PR (pnpm changset) for a patch release to @workflow/ai, also mentioning issue Bug: DurableAgent + OpenAI Responses API fails on tool calls due to missing required reasoning item #880
• Add a comment linking to issue Bug: DurableAgent + OpenAI Responses API fails on tool calls due to missing required reasoning item #880 on the code you added
• Rebase on main

and then this should be good to merge

[VaguelySerious]

@bhuvaneshprasad Was this PR succeeded by #889 and now works for you as intended? Let me know if not, otherwise I'll close this PR after some time

[bhuvaneshprasad]

Hi @VaguelySerious , the #889 should work. We can close this PR. Thanks