Skip to content
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

remove name from tool response #1263

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 16, 2024

Conversation

yenif
Copy link
Collaborator

@yenif yenif commented Jan 15, 2024

Why are these changes needed?

#1255

Related issue number

Closes #1255

Checks

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 15, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (bde2fc9) 32.10% compared to head (d6f2e2a) 51.20%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1263       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   32.10%   51.20%   +19.10%     
===========================================
  Files          32       32               
  Lines        4392     4394        +2     
  Branches     1024     1080       +56     
===========================================
+ Hits         1410     2250      +840     
+ Misses       2866     1941      -925     
- Partials      116      203       +87     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 51.13% <100.00%> (+19.07%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@sonichi
Copy link
Contributor

sonichi commented Jan 15, 2024

Thanks. Could you modify the test to address the test failures?

@sonichi sonichi requested review from ekzhu and maxim-saplin January 15, 2024 17:11
Copy link
Collaborator

@maxim-saplin maxim-saplin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Copy link
Collaborator

@davorrunje davorrunje left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, I just wonder should we still output the name of the function in the string.

autogen/agentchat/conversable_agent.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@qingyun-wu
Copy link
Contributor

@yenif the openai test is failing: https://github.com/microsoft/autogen/actions/runs/7532202265/job/20511225188?pr=1263#step:7:1189 Could you take a look this? Thank you!

@sonichi sonichi added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 16, 2024
Merged via the queue into microsoft:main with commit d1c1548 Jan 16, 2024
79 of 84 checks passed
@sonichi sonichi deleted the remove_name_from_tool_response branch January 16, 2024 03:11
joshkyh pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 17, 2024
* remove name from tool response

* fix tool response tests

* fix output string
whiskyboy pushed a commit to whiskyboy/autogen that referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2024
* remove name from tool response

* fix tool response tests

* fix output string
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug]: Unsupported field name in tool response
7 participants