feat: add reasoning and bump to 0.2.8#51
Conversation
Change-Id: Id4b13779ae1df816eff998bdb1dc38b74fae12ac
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@hanzeINGH has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 17 minutes and 47 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
WalkthroughThis pull request updates version numbers and adjusts a data model. The API’s Maven files and a service interceptor now reflect version 0.2.8 instead of 0.2.7. Additionally, a new field Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://waps.l3s.uni-hannover.de/live/im_/https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
api/src/main/java/com/coze/openapi/client/connversations/message/model/Message.java (1)
75-77: Add JavaDoc comment for reasoningContent field.The new
reasoningContentfield is missing a JavaDoc comment that describes its purpose and usage, which would be consistent with the documentation pattern used for other fields in this class.Consider adding a documentation comment similar to other fields:
+ /** + * The reasoning content associated with the message. + * This field contains the assistant's step-by-step thought process or reasoning behind the response. + */ @JsonProperty("reasoning_content") private String reasoningContent;
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
api/pom.xml(1 hunks)api/src/main/java/com/coze/openapi/client/connversations/message/model/Message.java(1 hunks)api/src/main/java/com/coze/openapi/service/utils/UserAgentInterceptor.java(1 hunks)example/pom.xml(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (3)
- example/pom.xml
- api/pom.xml
- api/src/main/java/com/coze/openapi/service/utils/UserAgentInterceptor.java
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (2)
- GitHub Check: test (Java 11 on macOS)
- GitHub Check: test (Java 11 on Windows)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
api/src/main/java/com/coze/openapi/client/connversations/message/model/Message.java (1)
78-124:Details
❓ Verification inconclusive
Consider updating builder methods for the new field.
The existing helper methods (such as
buildAssistantAnswer) do not include the newreasoningContentfield. If this field is used when an assistant responds, consider updating these methods or adding new ones that support setting this field.It would be helpful to understand if the reasoning content needs to be set through the existing builder methods, or if it's only populated when deserializing responses from the API.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Search for places where reasoning_content might be used in the codebase rg -A 2 -B 2 "reasoning_content" --glob "!Message.java" # Search for any references to reasoning rg -A 2 -B 2 "reasoning" --glob "!Message.java"Length of output: 103
Action Required: Verify New Field Handling in Builder Methods
It appears that none of the code outside of
Message.javareferences areasoningContentfield. However, because this new field is not currently exposed through any of the builder helper methods (e.g., inbuildAssistantAnswer), please confirm if the intent is to allow settingreasoningContentwhen constructing a message—or if it should only be populated during deserialization from the API responses. If external setting is required, consider either updating the existing helper methods or adding new ones that support thereasoningContentfield.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #51 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 76.25% 76.23% -0.02%
Complexity 214 214
============================================
Files 43 43
Lines 1196 1195 -1
Branches 84 84
============================================
- Hits 912 911 -1
Misses 223 223
Partials 61 61
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
hanzeINGH
force-pushed
the
feat_add_reasoning
branch
from
bb38847 to
3dbb1eb
Compare
1 participant
Change-Id: Id4b13779ae1df816eff998bdb1dc38b74fae12ac