Skip to content

Missing OpenAI-compatible / OpenResponses HTTP surface (vs OpenClaw Gateway) #1327

@Dhivya-Bharathy

Description

@Dhivya-Bharathy

Summary

Missing capability: Integrators using OpenAI client libraries or OpenResponses-shaped clients cannot point at Praison with the same HTTP contract OpenClaw exposes on the Gateway (OpenResponses, Chat Completions–style, tools invoke). Praison’s A2A / A2U / MCP / serve surfaces are powerful but not drop-in replacements for those routes.

Comparison

OpenClaw PraisonAI today
Documented Gateway HTTP compatibility layers Multiple servers; no advertised OpenResponses / OpenAI-compatible path as a single contract

Expected engineering outcomes (acceptance)

  • Contract matrix: table of OpenClaw routes vs Praison endpoint / gap, linked to implementation issues or marked not planned.
  • Code deliverable (preferred): thin compatibility layer on serve unified or dedicated sub-app with automated tests using a stock OpenAI Python client against a fixed subset of API (chat + tools or documented unsupported fields).
  • Close with merged adapter code (tests against a stock OpenAI client subset) or explicit wontfix with technical reason.

References (external)

Security

Any new HTTP surface must reuse existing auth, tenancy, and rate-limit patterns.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    documentationImprovements or additions to documentationsecurity

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions