Skip to content

refactor: split changes for api/services/tools/api_tools_manage_servi… #29899

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
crazywoola merged 16 commits into from
Dec 31, 2025
Merged

refactor: split changes for api/services/tools/api_tools_manage_servi… #29899

crazywoola merged 16 commits into from
Dec 31, 2025

Conversation

@asukaminato0721
Copy link
Contributor

@asukaminato0721 asukaminato0721 commented Dec 18, 2025

…ce.py

Important

  1. Make sure you have read our contribution guidelines
  2. Ensure there is an associated issue and you have been assigned to it
  3. Use the correct syntax to link this PR: Fixes #<issue number>.

Summary

part of #29289

Screenshots

Before After
... ...

Checklist

  • This change requires a documentation update, included: Dify Document
  • I understand that this PR may be closed in case there was no previous discussion or issues. (This doesn't apply to typos!)
  • I've added a test for each change that was introduced, and I tried as much as possible to make a single atomic change.
  • I've updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I ran dev/reformat(backend) and cd web && npx lint-staged(frontend) to appease the lint gods

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings December 18, 2025 12:39
@dosubot dosubot bot added the size:S This PR changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Dec 18, 2025
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

gemini-code-assist bot commented Dec 18, 2025

Summary of Changes

Hello @asukaminato0721, 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 undertakes a refactoring effort within the api_tools_manage_service.py file, primarily focusing on improving type safety and the handling of API provider schema types. The changes standardize the use of the ApiProviderSchemaType enum across relevant functions, which in turn allows for the removal of redundant validation logic and enables more dynamic and correct assignment of schema types during API tool provider updates.

Highlights

  • Enhanced Type Safety: The schema_type parameters and return types in several functions, including convert_schema_to_tool_bundles, create_api_tool_provider, update_api_tool_provider, and test_api_tool_preview, have been updated from str to the more specific ApiProviderSchemaType enum, improving type consistency and reducing potential errors.
  • Streamlined Schema Type Validation: Redundant manual validation checks for schema_type against ApiProviderSchemaType members have been removed from create_api_tool_provider and update_api_tool_provider. This change relies on the new type hints to enforce correct input types, simplifying the code.
  • Dynamic Schema Type Assignment: The update_api_tool_provider function now dynamically assigns the provider.schema_type_str based on the schema_type parameter passed to it, rather than hardcoding it to ApiProviderSchemaType.OPENAPI. This makes the update process more flexible and accurate.
  • Flexible Privacy Policy Parameter: The privacy_policy parameter in update_api_tool_provider has been updated to accept str | None, allowing for optional privacy policy values during updates.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

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. ↩

gemini-code-assist[bot]
gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Dec 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
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 refactors several methods to use the ApiProviderSchemaType enum instead of raw strings for schema_type, which is a great improvement for type safety. The changes also include removing some now-redundant validation checks. I've identified a couple of areas where the refactoring is incomplete, leading to an inconsistency and a potential runtime bug. My comments below provide details and suggestions for addressing these points. Overall, this is a positive change for code quality.

Copilot AI reviewed Dec 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR is part of issue #29289 and focuses on refactoring the api_tools_manage_service.py file with type safety improvements and code organization changes.

Key changes:

  • Improved type hints by changing schema_type parameters from str to ApiProviderSchemaType enum type
  • Reformatted function signatures for better readability (multi-line formatting)
  • Removed redundant schema type validation logic that checked enum membership

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

@asukaminato0721
Copy link
Contributor Author

asukaminato0721 commented Dec 29, 2025

/gemini review

gemini-code-assist[bot]
gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Dec 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
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 is a nice refactoring of the API tools management service. The main improvement is the consistent use of the ApiProviderSchemaType enum for schema type parameters instead of raw strings, which improves type safety and code readability. The removal of now-redundant validation logic in create_api_tool_provider and update_api_tool_provider is also a good cleanup. Additionally, a bug in update_api_tool_provider has been fixed where the schema type was previously hardcoded and is now correctly determined dynamically.

I've added one comment for a minor cleanup to remove an unused parameter, which is a leftover from the refactoring.

@asukaminato0721
Copy link
Contributor Author

asukaminato0721 commented Dec 30, 2025

cc @crazywoola this pr can be merged imo.

@dosubot dosubot bot added the lgtm This PR has been approved by a maintainer label Dec 31, 2025
@crazywoola crazywoola merged commit fb5edd0 into langgenius:main Dec 31, 2025
11 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code review Copilot Copilot left review comments

@crazywoola crazywoola crazywoola approved these changes

@QuantumGhost QuantumGhost Awaiting requested review from QuantumGhost QuantumGhost is a code owner

+1 more reviewer

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist[bot] gemini-code-assist[bot] left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

lgtm This PR has been approved by a maintainer size:S This PR changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@asukaminato0721 @crazywoola