[Dong1017]

Purpose

Release twin of the #9331 review fix: the Ref2VA dialogue prompts section (merged through #9332) claimed the same prompts behave the same way across serving stacks. The #8905 NPU matrix covers attention/cache variants on one stack and the separate GPU report uses a different bare-English prompt, so no matched same-prompt cross-stack comparison exists. The wording now describes the two reported observations separately plus the verified raw-prompt forwarding fact, and recommends the official format as the first step, without the cross-stack equivalence claim (review finding by @hsliuustc0106 on #9331).

Test Plan

• Recipe renders as Markdown; docs-only change, no code paths touched.

Test Result

• Docs-only; no runtime impact.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

---

^{Need help on this PR? Tag @codesmith-bot with what you need.}

[Dong1017]

@Gaohan123 — small docs follow-up for the release line: #9332 landed the Ref2VA dialogue-prompt contract here, and review on the main-side twin (#9331) required narrowing the cross-stack claim (the NPU matrix covers attention/cache variants while the GPU report uses a different prompt, so no matched same-prompt comparison exists — wording now separates the reported observations from the verified forwarding fact). #9381 applies that wording fix to release/v0.32.0, which still carries the pre-narrowing sentence. Could you take a look, or fold it into the batch cherry-pick route if that's easier? Thanks.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	⚠️ Failed 2026-10-26T08:02:14.942600Z We couldn’t complete this review. Comment @codex review to try again.	eb088c2	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex usage limits have been reached for code reviews. Please check with the admins of this repo to increase the limits by adding credits.
Credits must be used to enable repository wide code reviews.

[vllm-omni-review-bot]

This PR appears to be related to model: MinimaxH3.

Model owners: @david6666666 @Gaohan123 @hsliuustc0106

Routing: @david6666666 via semantic router, model owner, CODEOWNERS; @Gaohan123 via CODEOWNERS; @hsliuustc0106 via CODEOWNERS

@Dong1017, please review your own changes and leave a short self-review comment describing what you checked. PRs without author self-review may not be assigned a reviewer.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you would like an automated review, mention @vllm-omni-review-bot in a comment.

[vllm-omni-review-bot]

Omni ReviewBot triage note

Automated triage of commit eb088c25ebab produced:

• Priority: high. Prompt maintainer attention is suggested.

These are automated triage suggestions only — the final decision belongs to the maintainers.