Skip to content

feat: Fix LiteLLM provider detection and improve chat completion step naming#613

Merged
gustavocidornelas merged 3 commits intomainfrom
vini/open-9426-tool-step-type-should-display-actual-tool-name-instead-of
Mar 9, 2026
Merged

feat: Fix LiteLLM provider detection and improve chat completion step naming#613
gustavocidornelas merged 3 commits intomainfrom
vini/open-9426-tool-step-type-should-display-actual-tool-name-instead-of

Conversation

@viniciusdsmello
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

  • Add LITELLM_PREFIX_TO_PROVIDER_MAP to correctly resolve the provider when models are accessed via a LiteLLM proxy (e.g. gemini/gemini-2.5-flash now maps to Google instead of OpenAI)
  • Always use provider-based naming for chat completion steps (e.g. "Google Chat Completion") instead of accepting the generic run_name from the caller (e.g. "Language Model")

Test plan

  • Test with LiteLLM proxy serving Gemini models — verify provider shows Google instead of OpenAI
  • Test with LiteLLM proxy serving Anthropic models — verify provider shows Anthropic
  • Test direct OpenAI usage — verify provider still shows OpenAI
  • Verify chat completion step names use provider prefix (e.g. "Google Chat Completion")

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

viniciusdsmello and others added 3 commits March 8, 2026 12:28
…p naming

- Add LITELLM_PREFIX_TO_PROVIDER_MAP to resolve correct provider from model
  prefix (e.g. gemini/gemini-2.5-flash -> Google instead of OpenAI)
- Always use provider-based name for chat completion steps instead of
  accepting generic run_name from caller

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Keep only the model name after "/" (e.g. gemini/gemini-2.5-flash -> gemini-2.5-flash)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@gustavocidornelas gustavocidornelas merged commit 841ad25 into main Mar 9, 2026
5 checks passed
@gustavocidornelas gustavocidornelas deleted the vini/open-9426-tool-step-type-should-display-actual-tool-name-instead-of branch March 9, 2026 15:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants