weiqingy commented on code in PR #924:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink-agents/pull/924#discussion_r3763234959
##########
plan/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/agents/plan/actions/ChatModelAction.java:
##########
@@ -365,19 +367,35 @@ public ChatMessage call() throws Exception {
return chatModel.chat(messages, promptArgs, Map.of());
}
};
+ Map<String, Object> llmMetadata =
+ chatModel.getModel() == null ? Map.of() : Map.of(MODEL,
chatModel.getModel());
Review Comment:
nit: `MODEL` at `:63` doubles as the tool-request context key (`:126`,
`:501`), where the value is the Resource name rather than the model id. Python
writes the string directly too (`chat_model_action.py:351`), while the other
execution metadata keys sit in the `ToolExecutionMetadataKeys` /
`tool_execution_metadata_keys.py` pair. Since `entityMetadata.model` is now a
documented field, would a dedicated constant on both sides be worth it?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
