Skip to content

Conversation

@chupark
Copy link

@chupark chupark commented Oct 29, 2025

Related Issues or Context

This PR contains Changes to Non-Plugin

  • Documentation
  • Other

This PR contains Changes to Non-LLM Models Plugin

  • I have Run Comprehensive Tests Relevant to My Changes

This PR contains Changes to LLM Models Plugin

  • My Changes Affect Message Flow Handling (System Messages and User→Assistant Turn-Taking)
  • My Changes Affect Tool Interaction Flow (Multi-Round Usage and Output Handling, for both Agent App and Agent Node)
  • My Changes Affect Multimodal Input Handling (Images, PDFs, Audio, Video, etc.)
  • My Changes Affect Multimodal Output Generation (Images, Audio, Video, etc.)
  • My Changes Affect Structured Output Format (JSON, XML, etc.)
  • My Changes Affect Token Consumption Metrics
  • My Changes Affect Other LLM Functionalities (Reasoning Process, Grounding, Prompt Caching, etc.)
  • Other Changes (Add New Models, Fix Model Parameters etc.)

[ Add Reasoning Support on Model Authentication modal ]
Before
image

After
image

[ Add effort on LLM Node modal ]
Before
image

After
[ Thinking ]
image

[ No Thinking ]
image

Version Control (Any Changes to the Plugin Will Require Bumping the Version)

  • I have Bumped Up the Version in Manifest.yaml (Top-Level Version Field, Not in Meta Section)

Dify Plugin SDK Version

Environment Verification (If Any Code Changes)

Local Deployment Environment

  • Dify Version is: 1.9.2, I have Tested My Changes on Local Deployment Dify with a Clean Environment That Matches the Production Configuration.

SaaS Environment

  • I have Tested My Changes on cloud.dify.ai with a Clean Environment That Matches the Production Configuration

@dosubot dosubot bot added the size:M This PR changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Oct 29, 2025
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @chupark, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the openai_api_compatible plugin by integrating new reasoning capabilities for Large Language Models. It introduces a configuration option to indicate whether a model supports reasoning and, if so, provides granular control for "reasoning effort" through a new parameter. This allows for more sophisticated interaction with models that leverage advanced reasoning frameworks, offering users greater flexibility in model behavior.

Highlights

  • Reasoning Support Configuration: A new reasoning_thought_support credential has been added to the openai_api_compatible plugin, allowing users to explicitly declare whether an LLM model supports reasoning features.
  • Reasoning Effort Parameter: When reasoning_thought_support is enabled, a new reasoning_effort parameter becomes available for LLM models. This parameter allows users to select from "none", "low", "normal", or "high" to control the reasoning intensity for compatible models, such as Qwen3 on vLLM or SGLang.
  • Version Update: The openai_api_compatible plugin version has been incremented from 0.0.23 to 0.0.24 to reflect these new feature additions.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request introduces a new 'Reasoning effort' feature for OpenAI-compatible models. The changes include adding a new configuration option in the provider settings to enable reasoning support and a corresponding parameter rule in the LLM logic to control the reasoning effort level. The implementation is straightforward. I've identified a couple of minor areas for improvement regarding the new parameter's requirement status and a grammatical correction in a user-facing label. Overall, a good addition to enhance model capabilities.

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

Labels

enhancement New feature or request size:M This PR changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants