Use Parsera LLM Specs API instead of capabilities.rb
#132
Conversation
crmne
commented
Apr 22, 2025
crmne
commented
- Removed the OpenAI capabilities module and related methods.
- Simplified model parsing for OpenAI and Gemini providers, focusing on essential attributes.
- Introduced a new utility method for deep key symbolization in hashes.
- Updated OpenRouter model parsing to enhance data extraction and structure.
- Deleted obsolete browser and CLI helper tasks to streamline the codebase.
- Consolidated model updater logic into the Rake task for better maintainability.
- Improved error handling and logging throughout the model update process.
- Removed the OpenAI capabilities module and related methods. - Simplified model parsing for OpenAI and Gemini providers, focusing on essential attributes. - Introduced a new utility method for deep key symbolization in hashes. - Updated OpenRouter model parsing to enhance data extraction and structure. - Deleted obsolete browser and CLI helper tasks to streamline the codebase. - Consolidated model updater logic into the Rake task for better maintainability. - Improved error handling and logging throughout the model update process.
crmne
changed the title
| module Utils | ||
| module_function | ||
|
|
||
| def symbolize_keys_deep(hash) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| end | ||
|
|
||
| def fetch_parsera_models | ||
| response = Faraday.new('https://api.parsera.org/v1/llm-specs', request: { timeout: 60 }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't like the idea of a core dependency on a commercial 3rd party's API, though very much appreciate the value that Parsera is doing by standardizing LLM capabilities into a JSON.
I know the code isn't called during any main runtime functions and also appreciate the support from Parsera (seems like great company).
Maybe just move this code to the rake task? Don't feel strongly about this so if you don't want to that's fine.
|
Love this - the initiative by Parsera to standarize capabilities of models is fantastic! Although, I'm not confident that the LLMs are going to follow the same configs within the same capabilities so I question whether the capabilities should just be implemented in the provider classes (and if they're not implemented it means they aren't supported). For example, structured output is supported by Gemini but it is a vastly different implementation than the other LLMs. Anyways, still prob good to do this since it's just a better implementation of how the gem already works today. |
