Skip to content

fix(doc): Bad placement for Opencode variable - #28722

Open
tecnocat wants to merge 1 commit into
NousResearch:mainfrom
tecnocat:patch-1
Open

fix(doc): Bad placement for Opencode variable#28722
tecnocat wants to merge 1 commit into
NousResearch:mainfrom
tecnocat:patch-1

Conversation

@tecnocat

@tecnocat tecnocat commented May 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

What does this PR do?

Nothing, just move the doc section for Opencode environment variable.

Related Issue

None.

Type of Change

  • 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
  • ✨ New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
  • 🔒 Security fix
  • 📝 Documentation update
  • ✅ Tests (adding or improving test coverage)
  • ♻️ Refactor (no behavior change)
  • 🎯 New skill (bundled or hub)

Changes Made

Just move up the variable for Opencode

How to Test

  1. Go to https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-agent/blob/main/.env.example#L91
  2. Read the position of the variable
  3. Confirm everything is ok!

Checklist

Code

  • I've read the Contributing Guide
  • My commit messages follow Conventional Commits (fix(scope):, feat(scope):, etc.)
  • I searched for existing PRs to make sure this isn't a duplicate
  • My PR contains only changes related to this fix/feature (no unrelated commits)
  • I've run pytest tests/ -q and all tests pass
  • I've added tests for my changes (required for bug fixes, strongly encouraged for features)
  • I've tested on my platform:

Documentation & Housekeeping

  • I've updated relevant documentation (README, docs/, docstrings) — or N/A
  • I've updated cli-config.yaml.example if I added/changed config keys — or N/A
  • I've updated CONTRIBUTING.md or AGENTS.md if I changed architecture or workflows — or N/A
  • I've considered cross-platform impact (Windows, macOS) per the compatibility guide — or N/A
  • I've updated tool descriptions/schemas if I changed tool behavior — or N/A

For New Skills

  • This skill is broadly useful to most users (if bundled) — see Contributing Guide
  • SKILL.md follows the standard format (frontmatter, trigger conditions, steps, pitfalls)
  • No external dependencies that aren't already available (prefer stdlib, curl, existing Hermes tools)
  • I've tested the skill end-to-end: hermes --toolsets skills -q "Use the X skill to do Y"

Screenshots / Logs

@alt-glitch alt-glitch added type/docs Documentation improvements P3 Low — cosmetic, nice to have labels May 19, 2026
@teknium1

teknium1 commented Jun 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the focused documentation cleanup. The premise remains valid on current main: .env.example:105 ends the OpenCode Go block after OPENCODE_GO_API_KEY, while .env.example:116 places OPENCODE_GO_BASE_URL under Hugging Face. hermes_cli/providers.py:150-153 confirms that variable belongs to opencode-go.

Problems

Suggested changes

  • Salvage the one-line relocation after .env.example:105; no runtime or configuration-surface changes are needed.

This is an automated hermes-sweeper review.

@tecnocat

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Thanks for the focused docs cleanup.

I verified the premise against current main: .env.example still has # OPENCODE_GO_API_KEY= in the OpenCode Go section at line 98, but # OPENCODE_GO_BASE_URL=https://opencode.ai/zen/go/v1 is currently down under the Hugging Face block at line 108. The provider definition also confirms this env var belongs to OpenCode Go: hermes_cli/providers.py:153 sets base_url_env_var="OPENCODE_GO_BASE_URL" for opencode-go.

I don't see correctness or design-fit problems here. The diff is a one-line move in .env.example, preserves the existing env var, and does not add new configuration surface.

This is an automated hermes-sweeper review.

Thanks for the thorough review!

Exactly, it's just a quick alignment fix. As a human contributor doing this by hand, I wanted to ensure the .env.example perfectly matches the high standards of the Hermes ecosystem.

Every single line—down to the last comma—reflects the project's overall quality. Even minor visual glitches can distract from an otherwise flawless developer experience, and everything adds up in the end.

Since it doesn't break anything, doesn't add config overhead, and visually fixes the documentation block, let's merge it! 🤝

@teknium1 teknium1 added the sweeper:blast-contained Sweeper blast radius: contained — one narrow path / opt-in / few users label Jul 13, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

P3 Low — cosmetic, nice to have sweeper:blast-contained Sweeper blast radius: contained — one narrow path / opt-in / few users type/docs Documentation improvements

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants