Repository navigation
Update the kilo enkrypt integration for new models #6808
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
WARNING:
laguna-s-2.1is mapped withsource: 'xAI'while its canonical target ispoolside/laguna-s-2.1.sourceis part of the exact identity key used bymatchEnkryptScores(identity.source === score.source), and Laguna models are published by Poolside — the sibling entrylaguna-xs-2.1below correctly usessource: 'poolside'. If Enkrypt reportspoolsidefor this record, the mapping never matches and the model's stats are dropped asunreviewed_identity. The fixture atapps/web/src/tests/fixtures/enkrypt-scores.ts:154mirrors the same value, so the test suite cannot catch it.Reply with
@kilocode-bot fix itto have Kilo Code address this issue.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The feedback is not accurate. Fresh live API call (seconds ago) confirms Enkrypt reports:
laguna-s-2.1 | provider: openai_compatible | source: xAI
laguna-xs-2.1 | provider: openai_compatible | source: poolside
Our mapping's source: 'xAI' for laguna-s-2.1 is exactly what the real leaderboard returns — captured from the live response when I added the mappings, not assumed. Enkrypt's source field reflects where they served the model for evaluation, not the publisher: they ran Laguna S 2.1 through xAI's endpoint and Laguna XS 2.1 through Poolside's, hence the sibling entries differ.
If we "corrected" it to 'poolside' per the feedback, the identity (laguna-s-2.1, openai_compatible, poolside) would never match any real Enkrypt record — creating exactly the silent unreviewed_identity drop the reviewer's warning describes. The fixture mirroring the mapping is by design (it encodes reviewed identities), so the test suite enforcing mapping↔fixture parity is working as intended; live API validation like this is the actual safety check.
The canonical target poolside/laguna-s-2.1 is right — only the identity triple must match Enkrypt's record, and it does. No change made.