# What does this PR do?
This provides an initial [OpenAI Responses
API](https://platform.openai.com/docs/api-reference/responses)
implementation. The API is not yet complete, and this is more a
proof-of-concept to show how we can store responses in our key-value
stores and use them to support the Responses API concepts like
`previous_response_id`.
## Test Plan
I've added a new
`tests/integration/openai_responses/test_openai_responses.py` as part of
a test-driven development for this new API. I'm only testing this
locally with the remote-vllm provider for now, but it should work with
any of our inference providers since the only API it requires out of the
inference provider is the `openai_chat_completion` endpoint.
```
VLLM_URL="http://localhost:8000/v1" \
INFERENCE_MODEL="meta-llama/Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct" \
llama stack build --template remote-vllm --image-type venv --run
```
```
LLAMA_STACK_CONFIG="http://localhost:8321" \
python -m pytest -v \
tests/integration/openai_responses/test_openai_responses.py \
--text-model "meta-llama/Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct"
```
---------
Signed-off-by: Ben Browning <bbrownin@redhat.com>
Co-authored-by: Ashwin Bharambe <ashwin.bharambe@gmail.com>
# What does this PR do?
When clients called the Open AI API with invalid input that wasn't
caught by our own Pydantic API validation but instead only caught by the
backend inference provider, that backend inference provider was
returning a HTTP 400 error. However, we were wrapping that into a HTTP
500 error, obfuscating the actual issue from calling clients and
triggering OpenAI client retry logic.
This change adjusts our existing `translate_exception` method in
`server.py` to wrap `openai.BadRequestError` as HTTP 400 errors, passing
through the string representation of the error message to the calling
user so they can see the actual input validation error and correct it. I
tried changing this in a few other places, but ultimately
`translate_exception` was the only real place to handle this for both
streaming and non-streaming requests across all inference providers that
use the OpenAI server APIs.
This also tightens up our validation a bit for the OpenAI chat
completions API, to catch empty `messages` parameters, invalid
`tool_choice` parameters, invalid `tools` items, or passing
`tool_choice` when `tools` isn't given.
Lastly, this extends our OpenAI API chat completions verifications to
also check for consistent input validation across providers. Providers
behind Llama Stack should automatically pass all the new tests due to
the input validation added here, but some of the providers fail this
test when not run behind Llama Stack due to differences in how they
handle input validation and errors.
(Closes#1951)
## Test Plan
To test this, start an OpenAI API verification stack:
```
llama stack run --image-type venv tests/verifications/openai-api-verification-run.yaml
```
Then, run the new verification tests with your provider(s) of choice:
```
python -m pytest -s -v \
tests/verifications/openai_api/test_chat_completion.py \
--provider openai-llama-stack
python -m pytest -s -v \
tests/verifications/openai_api/test_chat_completion.py \
--provider together-llama-stack
```
Signed-off-by: Ben Browning <bbrownin@redhat.com>
Test plan:
python tests/verifications/generate_report.py --providers
fireworks,together,llama_meta_ref,openai
Co-authored-by: Eric Huang <erichuang@fb.com>
# What does this PR do?
## Test Plan
(myenv) ➜ llama-stack python tests/verifications/generate_report.py
--providers fireworks,together,openai --run-tests
f27f617629/tests/verifications/REPORT.md
# What does this PR do?
- provider and their models now live in config.yaml
- better distinguish different cases within a test
- add model key to surface provider's model_id
- include example command to rerun single test case
## Test Plan
<img width="1173" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b414baf0-c768-451f-8c3b-c2905cf36fac"
/>
