Skip to content

Conversation

@apappascs
Copy link
Contributor

#4804

Thank you for taking time to contribute this pull request!
You might have already read the contributor guide, but as a reminder, please make sure to:

  • Add a Signed-off-by line to each commit (git commit -s) per the DCO
  • Rebase your changes on the latest main branch and squash your commits
  • Add/Update unit tests as needed
  • Run a build and make sure all tests pass prior to submission

For more details, please check the contributor guide.
Thank you upfront!

Signed-off-by: Alexandros Pappas <apappascs@gmail.com>
@apappascs apappascs force-pushed the test/validate-reasoning-effort-parameter-4804 branch from 8a29f9d to aec4bf8 Compare November 6, 2025 10:25
Signed-off-by: Alexandros Pappas <apappascs@gmail.com>
… in OpenAiChatModelIT

Signed-off-by: Alexandros Pappas <apappascs@gmail.com>
}

@Test
@Disabled("The reasoning_effort option is only available in o1 models.")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test result isn't consistent with the current settings as the reasoning tokens end up being "0" in some cases when the model doesn't seem to use reasoning tokens for simple problems unless being more specific with the prompt message.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I will update the prompt when merging.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you @ilayaperumalg for pointing this out.
just updated with the example from claude https://docs.claude.com/en/docs/build-with-claude/extended-thinking
and set it to high. already run it 10 times without failure, but I am not sure if there is a case to have reasoning tokens end up being "0"

}

@Test
void testReasoningEffortWithDifferentLevels() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test can be an overhead as this doesn't exactly verify the reasoning tokens from the output. What do you think?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree just wanted to verify all reasoning levels work. lemme update the PR

@ilayaperumalg ilayaperumalg self-assigned this Nov 6, 2025
Signed-off-by: Alexandros Pappas <apappascs@gmail.com>
@ilayaperumalg ilayaperumalg added this to the 1.1.0.RC1 milestone Nov 6, 2025
@ilayaperumalg
Copy link
Member

@apappascs Thank you for the quick follow up and updates. The changes look good. Rebased, squashed and merged as e157775

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants