Enforce supervisor schema class name matches its type literal

[jason810496]

Why

The six supervisor discriminated unions (ToTask, ToSupervisor, ToManager, ToDagProcessor, ToTriggerRunner, ToTriggerSupervisor) need every member's class __name__ to equal its type: Literal[...] value so CommsDecoder routes wire frames to the right class — but nothing enforced that invariant, and two members had silently drifted on main.

What

• Add task-sdk/tests/task_sdk/execution_time/test_supervisor_schemas_name_type_sync.py — a parametrized unit test (one case per union) that walks every member and asserts class __name__ equals its single-value type Literal. Catches drift, a missing type field, and multi-value Literals. Runs as part of the task-sdk test suite.
• Fix the two pre-existing mismatches the new test surfaces in task-sdk/src/airflow/sdk/execution_time/comms.py:
  • XComCountResponse: Literal["XComLengthResponse"] → Literal["XComCountResponse"]
  • GetXComCount: Literal["GetNumberXComs"] → Literal["GetXComCount"]
• Update the one assertion in task-sdk/tests/task_sdk/execution_time/test_supervisor.py that pinned the old wire string.

Verfication

---

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

• Yes, with help of Claude Code Opus 4.7 following the guidelines

[jason810496]

I made the type literal field here in sync with class name.

Additionally, there isn't any Lang-SDK references the supervisor schema so far, so this should not impact anything IMO.

[amoghrajesh]

Yeah I think we are safe here, but just to be sure, can you check if go-sdk is fine reference wise?

[jason810496]

Yes, I just double check that the current Go-SDK go with the Edge Worker API direction. Only the upcoming Coordinator interface will be impacted (but we haven't released any coordinator yet, so we are good!)

[amoghrajesh]

Ah symmetrically wrong!

[amoghrajesh]

Yeah I think we are safe here, but just to be sure, can you check if go-sdk is fine reference wise?

[jscheffl]

Not sure if considered but besides making it static check at coding time, have we considered making this a runtime property handled by Pydantic?

class BaseCommClass(BaseModel):
    """Base type class."""

    type: str = "__undefined__"

    def __init__(self):
        super().__init__()
        self.type = self.__class__.__name__

class MyType1(BaseCommClass):
    """Another type."""

    pass

class MyType2(BaseCommClass):
    """Another type."""

    pass


print(MyType1().type)
print(MyType2().type)