-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 365
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix: ignore top_p if extended thinking is enabled for playground #6720
Conversation
and "type" in invocation_parameters["thinking"] | ||
and invocation_parameters["thinking"]["type"] == "enabled" | ||
): | ||
invocation_parameters.pop("top_p", None) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this bubble up an error to the UI somehow? It feels like something a user shouldn't be able to input
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this is just a stopgap for now
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the invocation parameter system does not have enough levers to allow us to change the presence of a field based on another in the UI, so we need to process these kinds of things somewhere. If the server is going to be invoking the anthropic client, who declared this validation rule, then the server might as well be responsible for stripping the extra key imo
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
that makes sense
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
on the other hand, this is changing the user's input silently, instead of rejecting it, since if this is rejected, user has no other way to change their input, so it's not really validation.
resolves #6711