Jaroslav Beneš
9761082fa1
Asked to remind somebody every Monday, a model looked down its tool list, found notes_create described as "something worth having in a later conversation" and memory_add beginning with the word Remember, wrote a note, and reported that it had scheduled something. Every screen agreed with it. There was no scheduling tool at all -- the near-misses were the only thing there was to reach for, and nothing anywhere said the thing it was being asked for existed. The seam had been left open on purpose: Schedule.origin has defined ORIGIN_MODEL, with no writer, since scheduling shipped, and services/schedules.py says in its first line that it holds what the routes *and the tools* both need. This is the tool that was meant to go through it. Four of them, and a thin layer: rule.validate is still the one total normaliser the form and the compile share, schedules.create still writes the row and the task chat together, and rule.describe still says what came out. A second dialect for models would mean two definitions of "every other Tuesday" and one of them going quietly wrong. The result is that description, never "done". A schedule is invisible until it fires, which may be days away, so the sentence in the reply is the only moment anybody can check that Monday was read as Monday -- and the tool says so, in the text the model reads back. The list badges the ones nobody typed. Gated on schedule.use rather than a permission of its own: somebody who may set one up by hand may say so to a model instead, and a second checkbox beside the first would only ever be answered "the same as that one". Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
4 lines
105 B
Python
4 lines
105 B
Python
"""LLeMbas - a Middle-earth themed web UI for OpenAI-compatible LLM endpoints."""
|
|
|
|
__version__ = "0.9.0"
|