feat: add reasoning_content field to chat completions response #536
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
With the latest merges our pipeline should be runnable again. If you rebase we can see if this change will merge cleanly. |
Add support for the reasoning_content field in chat completions API responses. This field is added at the same level as content in both streaming and non-streaming requests. The field is marked as optional to handle cases where it's not present in the API response.
rxrw
force-pushed
the
add-reasoning-content
branch
from
1d178e8 to
4415acd
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What:
Description:
Add support for the
reasoning_contentfield in chat completions API responses. This field is added at the same level as content in both streaming and non-streaming requests. The field is marked as optional to handle cases where it's not present in the API response.Related:
#517