Repository navigation
tool use without auto execution - #162
Conversation
Added detailed explanations for tool use modes, including examples for open loop and closed loop execution.
Updated README to clarify tool-call and tool-result usage.
Added new types and enums for tool calls and responses.
tomayac
left a comment
tomayac
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tried to make the code samples more readable and correct. Maybe consider running them all through a tool like prettier, which catches typos like missing commas or parentheses.
As general feedback, could the explainer outline why developers would choose closed vs. open?
Co-authored-by: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
Added explanation about automatic execution and constraints in planner loop.
|
I added a new section to describe use cases where open loop is preferred. cc @tomayac |
|
I hadn't previously considered the context compression use case. That's interesting and motivating to enable developers to manipulate the conversation at this low level. |
nico-martin
left a comment
nico-martin
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this implementation has a few weaknesses when it comes to distinguishing between a Message and a Message.Content element:
Message: Can have a specific role (whether it comes from the user, the assistant, or a tool call); it essentially describes the sender.
Message.Content: There can be multiple instances per Message; it describes the type of content.
I tried to make this concrete with a couple of comments.
|
@jingyun19 does the current PR reflect the Chromium implementation? The initial CL was merged. Remaining work? |
Yes it reflects the Chromium implementation. I believe the only remaining work is to support ToolCall type in input. However, for us to do a dev trial, we also have the remaining work to fully support parsing and formatting tool types in the inference engine infrastructure. |
Co-authored-by: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
|
The updated spec is ready for review. |
michaelwasserman
left a comment
michaelwasserman
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for picking up this complex and important spec work again!
|
FYI @FrankLi-MSFT and @sushraja-msft |
Clarified expectedInputs and LanguageModelToolSuccess.result structure in README.
Clarify behavior of session.prompt() with expectedOutputs.
SHA: 8040b81 Reason: push, by michaelwasserman Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
8 participants
Update explainer and spec to support tool use functionalities without automatic execution.
Explainer: added an example and explained how to make tool calls
Spec: reflect IDL changes in https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/7092943
Preview | Diff