fix: auto acknowledge assistant events

[WilliamBergamin]

Summary

MEGRE #2329 FIRST!

Since #2283 event requests are no longer auto acknowledged in the processEvent function. This behavior was handed over to the autoAcknowledge middleware. This PR aims to add auto acknowledge behavior back into the assistant event handlers.

Requirements

• I've read and understood the Contributing Guidelines and have done my best effort to follow them.
• I've read and agree to the Code of Conduct.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 89.33333% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 91.04%. Comparing base (2f25b21) to head (51eaa89).
Report is 2 commits behind head on autoack.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/Assistant.ts	87.87%	8 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           autoack    #2330      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    91.08%   91.04%   -0.05%     
===========================================
  Files           22       22              
  Lines         6116     6140      +24     
  Branches       655      666      +11     
===========================================
+ Hits          5571     5590      +19     
- Misses         540      545       +5     
  Partials         5        5              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[misscoded]

I'm going on record (again) to say that I really am not a fan of this approach. The function listener is the only one that requires a special case of opt-out for ack. AFAIK (and correct me if I'm wrong) this delayed ack is not applicable to the Assistant class, nor presumably other classes that follow a similar, instance-based event handling manner, and we're introducing code just to accommodate it.

If my assumption above is incorrect and the delayed ack is applicable across the board, then I stand corrected and this seems like a suitable approach.

If accurate, then it would be better IMO to introduce an option (similar to the opt-out of JIT function tokens) that is specific and limited to function listeners receiving the ability to ack manually.

[filmaj]

If accurate, then it would be better IMO to introduce an option (similar to the opt-out of JIT function tokens) that is specific and limited to function listeners receiving the ability to ack manually.

If we were to follow the JIT token opt-out approach, this would result in auto-ack being a global option, applying to all custom functions or none. I don't like this suggestion as it would force developers who have existing custom functions that answer to function_executed events to need to change their code (add an explicit ack).

I'm not married to any particular implementation, but I do feel like the auto-ack feature should be implemented in a way so as to enable per-function granularity. If the middleware based approach is unacceptable, then let's revert it and go back to the drawing board.

[WilliamBergamin]

I've introduced some changes that fix the bugs brought by #2283 to the assistant handlers. These changes were taken from the behavior of Bolt-Python and aim to align the python and js architectures