After the end of Phase 5, only adaptation 1 of 9 from spec §6 was
applied (Screenshot button iff vision, render_files_and_media:3030).
The pattern is established; the remaining 8 are mechanical
applications of the same pattern at their respective render sites.
The follow-up track applies the wrapping at:
- tools toggle (tool_calling)
- cache panel (caching)
- stream progress (streaming)
- fetch models button (model_discovery)
- token budget max (context_window)
- cost panel (3 cost_tracking states: estimate / 'Free (local)' / '-')
The _get_active_capabilities() helper (t5.1) is already in place.
As of end of Phase 4, only _send_minimax has a working tool-call loop.
Phase 3 (Grok, Llama) and Phase 2 (Qwen) entry points are single-shot;
they call send_openai_compatible once and return without executing
tool_calls. If the user notices 'tool execution doesn't work for
Qwen/Grok/Llama' after Phase 5 ships, the fix is to lift the tool
loop into a shared run_with_tool_loop() helper that wraps
send_openai_compatible. The 4 existing vendors (_send_anthropic /
_send_gemini / _send_gemini_cli / _send_deepseek) already have the
same inline duplication, so the lift would also help those.
This is a follow-up track, not in scope for qwen_llama_grok_integration_20260606.
Grok's own recommendation (consulted 2026-06-11):
'xAI (Grok) | xAI official OpenAI-compatible (https://api.x.ai/v1) |
Fully compatible and clean. Supports Grok-2 + Grok-2-Vision. No
meaningful unique native surface lost by using the compatible
endpoint.'
This REVERSES the earlier 'xAI native' correction. The OpenAI-
compatible approach for Grok is the canonical full-featured path;
the implementation in Phase 3 (OpenAI SDK with base_url=https://api.x.ai/v1
+ send_openai_compatible helper) is correct as-is.
Updates to the spec:
1. §3.1.1: replaced the 'use xAI native' decision with the confirmed
per-vendor table. Qwen=Native, Grok=OpenAI-Compatible (per Grok's
own confirmation), MiniMax=OpenAI-Compatible, DeepSeek=OpenAI-
Compatible, Ollama=OpenAI-Compatible-in-v1 (native in v2),
Meta Llama API=Native (new 4th backend, follow-up), Gemini=Native
(follow-up), Anthropic=Native (follow-up). Also added Grok's
recommended v2 matrix field expansion: audio, video, grounding,
computer_use, local, reasoning/extended_thinking, web_search,
x_search, code_execution, file_search, mcp_support, structured_output.
2. §4.3: reverted from 'Grok via xAI (Native REST API)' back to
'Grok via xAI (OpenAI-Compatible) - confirmed 2026-06-11'. The
implementation does NOT need a native refactor; the OpenAI SDK
at https://api.x.ai/v1 is the canonical approach. Removed the
earlier 'caching: true' entry from the registry (since the
OpenAI-compat shim doesn't expose prompt_cache_key) and the
'no persistent client' state struct (back to the OpenAI SDK
pattern).
3. §13.1.B: renamed from 'Native Vendor APIs' to 'Llama Native APIs
(Ollama native + Meta Llama API)' and removed the Grok native
refactor item (Grok says OpenAI-compat is fine). Kept the Ollama
native + Meta Llama API items + matrix expansion. Clarified that
Grok tests do NOT need rewriting; only Llama tests get 2 more
(native Ollama, Meta Llama API).
Net effect: the Phase 3 work that just shipped (Grok+Llama Green
using OpenAI-compat shim) is CORRECT as-is. The implementation
matches Grok's actual recommendation. No code rollback needed.
Three additions to the spec, per the user's architectural correction
in this session:
1. NEW section 3.1.1: 'Architectural principle: Use the best API per
vendor' — explains why the OpenAI-compatible shim loses vendor-
specific features (xAI: prompt_cache_key, reasoning_effort, server-
side tools, cost_in_usd_ticks; Ollama: think param, images array,
thinking field, structured outputs) and states the principle:
'use each vendor's native SDK or REST API when one exists, falling
back to OpenAI-compatible only when no native option exists.'
Also notes that the capability matrix IS the aggregate tracker;
future native features go into the matrix, and the GUI filters
based on it (no per-vendor UI branches).
2. UPDATED section 4.3 (Grok): 'Grok via xAI (Native REST API)' — was
'OpenAI-Compatible'. Now specifies two native endpoints
(/v1/chat/completions and /v1/responses), the native features that
matter, the updated capability registry (caching=true for Grok
via prompt_cache_key), and a 'Phase 3 placeholder behavior' note
that this track's Phase 3 ships the OpenAI-compatible Grok as a
placeholder. The native refactor is deferred to follow-up B.
3. UPDATED section 13.1: added follow-up track B 'Native Vendor APIs
(post-OpenAI-compatible-placeholder)' which documents:
- Grok → xAI native REST
- Llama (Ollama) → native /api/chat
- Llama (Meta Llama API) → new 4th backend (deferred pending
verification of Meta's API spec; llama.developer.meta.com/docs/overview
returned 400 on fetch this session)
- Capability matrix expansion (web_search, x_search, code_execution,
file_search, mcp_support, reasoning_effort, structured_output)
- Test rewrites (mock requests.post instead of chat.completions.create)
This is a docs-only commit; no code changes. The Phase 3 Green work
continues with the OpenAI-compatible approach as planned in the
existing Red tests (t3.3 Grok + t3.14 Llama), and the follow-up track
B handles the native refactor when prioritized.
New track for prior-session sepia tint:
- 3 new theme slots (prior_session_bg, prior_session_tint, prior_session_amount)
- per-palette state dict mirroring _brightness/_contrast/_gamma
- apply_prior_tint helper (float-only math per user requirement)
- 6 prior-session render sites wrapped (2 bubble_vendor swaps + 4 tint wraps)
- Theme Settings panel slider with persistence
Code-block tonemap fix is OUT OF SCOPE (upstream imgui_bundle 1.92.5
API only exposes 4-value PaletteId enum, no per-instance struct).
See spec §1.1.1 and design doc 'Honest constraint' section.
These were authored at track start but missed by the final-state
commit. They are the brief 1-2 page design intent and executable
plan for the docs sync track. The closing report at
docs/reports/docs_sync_test_era_20260610.md summarizes the actual
17-commit execution.
- state.toml: status active->completed, all 25 tasks marked complete
with commit SHAs, all 4 phases checkpointed
- metadata.json: status active->shipped, 17-commit list, all 9
verification criteria flipped to DONE
The user said (verbatim): "On number 1. I love the idea and definitely
see poitental." This commit creates a full track that promotes the
ASCII-sketch UX ideation workflow
(docs/reports/ascii_sketch_ux_workflow_20260608.md, 340 lines) to
a real track with a concrete first target.
The track complements (does not replace) the existing
manual_ux_validation_20260302 track (which is a general UX review
track; this 2026-06-08 track is *focused* on the ASCII-sketch
workflow specifically).
Files (5 total, ~52KB, 12,000+ words):
- spec.md (186 lines, 9 sections) - track design, 5 open
questions, first target analysis, SSDL cross-reference
- plan.md (~280 lines, 4 phases, 21 tasks) - TDD-style with
WHERE/WHAT/HOW/SAFETY annotations
- metadata.json (~120 lines) - structured metadata, 5 open
questions with defaults, 5 SSDL principles available
- state.toml (~95 lines) - per-task tracking + phase status
- index.md (~50 lines) - track context + related docs
Key design decisions captured:
1. Two distinct vocabularies are conflated at first glance:
- GUI ASCII (the workflow) for panel sketches
- SSDL (computational shapes digest) for internal code sketches
Spec §2.6 makes the distinction explicit; both are useful for
this track (GUI ASCII for Phase 2 design; SSDL for Phase 3
internal refactoring documentation).
2. The 5 open questions from the workflow report (Q1 vocabulary,
Q2 comparison policy, Q3 storage location, Q4 tooling,
Q5 frequency) are documented with sensible defaults in
spec.md §2.1-2.5 and metadata.json. The user can override
any of them; defaults pre-stage the work.
3. First target is src/gui_2.py:3770 render_discussion_entry
(Discussion Hub per-entry panel). Rationale:
- Most-edited surface (every AI/user message)
- User has strong opinions (per nagent_review_20260608 3 rounds
of corrections)
- 23-op matrix A1-A7 is the source of truth
- ImGui layout maps cleanly to ASCII
- SSDL defusing techniques can guide the internal refactoring
4. 4 phases: 1=resolve 5 questions, 2=execute workflow on first
target (1-3 ASCII rounds), 3=implement per design contract
(TDD with 7 test files for A1-A7 operations),
4=document the pattern + propose 5-7 next targets.
Cross-references added throughout:
- docs/reports/computational_shapes_ssdl_digest_20260608.md
(the SSDL digest, with explicit "this is a different vocabulary
for a different purpose" note in spec §2.6)
- docs/reports/ascii_sketch_ux_workflow_20260608.md (the workflow)
- docs/guide_discussions.md (the 23-op matrix A1-A7)
- conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/ (the source of the
user's editable-discussion corrections)
- conductor/tracks/manual_ux_validation_20260302/ (complementary
general UX review track)
- conductor/tracks/chunkification_optimization_20260608_PLACEHOLDER/
(the contingency track; referenced in spec §2.6 SSDL cross-ref)
No code modified. Track is active; Phase 1 (5 user-questions) is
the current phase. User-confirmed worth doing in the prior turn.
ed
conductor-tier2