fix: negotiate unsupported sampling controls across transports - #774
Conversation
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
Reviewed and fixed the current stack head. The shared |
|
Current-head review: head 8977384 is based on closed branch feat/paper-grounded-auto-orchestration-20260820 (PR #766), so GitHub reports no required Checks. The current successor #765 does not contain the old provider_protocol field; retargeting without a rebase would expand this into a 72-file diff. Please rebase/cherry-pick the two capability-negotiation commits onto the current #765/main integration line, preserve the 16 focused tests, and make the exception-chain walk honor suppress_context so raise-from-none cannot trigger an unrelated temperature retry. Re-run hosted Checks and obtain independent approval before merge. |
|
Successor PR #779 is open on the exact current #765 integration head. It reapplies only the temperature capability negotiation at the current common chat/raw transport boundary, with 1468 full-suite passes. #774 remains intentionally unretargeted and unmerged because its closed-base history has no hosted required Checks; no force-push or protection bypass was used. |
Summary
temperaturewhen the selected provider rejects that optional control with HTTP 400/422Evidence
uv run pytest tests/test_provider_protocol.py tests/test_provider_integration.py -q:16 passed459 passedgit diff --check: passedDecision record
docs/planning/adrs/0012-optional-sampling-capability-negotiation.mdThis PR is intentionally scoped as a stack on
feat/paper-grounded-auto-orchestration-20260820; it does not modify or force-push draft PR #765. Hosted Checks are not materialized for this non-default base, so this evidence is not a protected-main merge claim.