fix: Incorrect order when Advisors have the same order

[YunKuiLu]

If the order of Advisors is the same, then it should follow the order in which the parameters are passed in.

When I add new SimpleLoggerAdvisor(Ordered.LOWEST_PRECEDENCE) to defaultAdvisors. Since ChatModelCallAdvisor has the same order as SimpleLoggerAdvisor, it will result in the order of ChatModelCallAdvisor being before that of SimpleLoggerAdvisor after sorting.

In the end, even if SimpleLoggerAdvisor continued to execute, it would be of no use.

[markpollack]

I think we should throw an exception, at at least log a warning, if anything would be short circuit. Probably in DefaultChatClient's

		private BaseAdvisorChain buildAdvisorChain() {
			// At the stack bottom add the model call advisors.
			// They play the role of the last advisors in the advisor chain.
			this.advisors.add(ChatModelCallAdvisor.builder().chatModel(this.chatModel).build());
			this.advisors.add(ChatModelStreamAdvisor.builder().chatModel(this.chatModel).build());

			return DefaultAroundAdvisorChain.builder(this.observationRegistry)
				.pushAll(this.advisors)
				.templateRenderer(this.templateRenderer)
				.build();
		}

[YunKuiLu]

I think we should throw an exception, at at least log a warning, if anything would be short circuit. Probably in DefaultChatClient's

Would it be easier to check for the short circuit in this method?

public class DefaultAroundAdvisorChain implements BaseAdvisorChain {
...
  @Override
  public ChatClientResponse nextCall(ChatClientRequest chatClientRequest) {
    ...
    
    if (this.callAdvisors.isEmpty()) {
	    throw new IllegalStateException("No CallAdvisors available to execute");
    }
    
    var advisor = this.callAdvisors.pop();
    
    if (advisor instanceof ChatModelCallAdvisor && !this.callAdvisors.isEmpty()){
         // Short circuit detected
    }
    ... 
  }
...
}