refactor(libsy): separate task context from judge instructions - #899
nachiketb-nvidia wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Signed-off-by: nachiketb <nachiketb@nvidia.com>
|
|
Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius. No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository: NVIDIA-NeMo/Switchyard/.coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Enterprise Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 12 included reviews per hour; 11 remain after this review. Walkthrough
ChangesMessage Selection
Priority: ⬇️ Low Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~5 minutes Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to The refactor is mergeable with no identified behavior or availability risk. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
A rabbit checks each message in a row Comment |
Superseded by #900, which includes this input refactor and the judge configuration refactor. Review and merge #900 → #901.
What
Separate conversation selection from the LLM judge's trailing routing instruction. Both judge types can use the same task window and reasoning removal; LLM requests keep their existing messages and prompt.
Why
Decision requests need conversation data without an instruction to emit LLM routing JSON. This is the first part of SWITCH-1687.
How
Extract
TaskInput::messagesand have the existingClassifierInputimplementation append its LLM instruction afterward. Routing, thresholds, affinity, and fallback are unchanged.Validation
cargo fmt --all --checkand commit-hook workspace Clippy.Notes for reviewers
This change is included in #900. The active stack is #900 → #901.
One file, +10 / −2 lines.
Summary by CodeRabbit