## Problem
A FIND_RECORDS workflow step with a filter configured could silently
return every record (and thus the first row of the table) instead of
applying the filter. Ways to hit it:
- `recordFilters` set but `recordFilterGroups` omitted (e.g. an
API/agent caller, or any non-UI config).
- A grouped filter (carrying `recordFilterGroupId`) whose
`recordFilterGroups` is missing.
- A filter referencing an unknown `fieldMetadataId` or an unresolvable
relation (`turnRecordFilterIntoRecordGqlOperationFilter` returns
`undefined`, silently dropped).
- `gqlOperationFilter` set, which passed validation but was never read.
In every case the computed filter collapses to `{}`,
`FindRecordsService` returns all records ordered by `id ASC`, and
`records[0]` is the first row. This is fail-open: the step reports
success and returns wrong records rather than erroring.
## Fix
- Compute the filter whenever `recordFilters` is non-empty, defaulting
`recordFilterGroups` to `[]`. `computeRecordGqlOperationFilter` handles
ungrouped filters independently of groups.
- **Fail closed**: if `recordFilters` is non-empty but the computed
`gqlOperationFilter` is empty, throw `INVALID_STEP_INPUT` instead of
running an unfiltered query. This covers grouped-without-groups and
unknown-field/unresolvable-relation cases raised in review. An absent or
empty `recordFilters` still legitimately means "find all".
- Remove the unused `gqlOperationFilter` field from the find-records
input type and settings schema so it is no longer advertised as a filter
option (it has been dead since #16147, when the action moved to
computing the filter at runtime from `recordFilters`).
Thomas Trompette
ad8830ecbf