Skip to content

fix(llm-callsite): pass callSite in approval generators#26508

Merged
siddseethepalli merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
swarm/rv1p/task-9
Apr 18, 2026
Merged

fix(llm-callsite): pass callSite in approval generators#26508
siddseethepalli merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
swarm/rv1p/task-9

Conversation

@siddseethepalli
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@siddseethepalli siddseethepalli commented Apr 18, 2026

Add approval-specific call sites and pass them through sendMessage options so CallSiteRoutingProvider can select per-site routing.

Addresses feedback on #26466.


Open in Devin Review

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@devin-ai-integration devin-ai-integration Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Devin Review found 1 potential issue.

View 1 additional finding in Devin Review.

Open in Devin Review

Comment on lines +58 to +59
"approvalCopy",
"approvalConversation",
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🚩 New call sites not seeded in latency-optimized migration 040

Migration 040-seed-latency-callsite-defaults.ts:66-74 seeds latency-optimized defaults (fast model, low effort, thinking disabled) for several background call sites including guardianQuestionCopy. The new approvalCopy and approvalConversation call sites are functionally similar (short approval-related LLM calls with tight timeouts of 5s and 8s respectively). Without migration entries, these new call sites fall through to llm.default (opus + max effort), which may be more expensive and slower than intended for what are essentially latency-sensitive background tasks. This isn't a bug per se — the code works correctly — but it may be an oversight given the migration's stated purpose of preventing exactly this cost/latency regression for background tasks.

Open in Devin Review

Was this helpful? React with 👍 or 👎 to provide feedback.

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.

1 participant