Skip to content
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.

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

feat: fast_reply hook #949

Merged

Conversation

alfredotoselli
Copy link

Description

An attempt to tackle the related issue

  • The new hook skips the memory recall and the main agent
  • The user message that triggers the hook is still added to the episodic memory
  • Conversation history is updated

  • The why is not populated, not sure how to handle it in this case
  • Not clear to me what "introduce proper cleaning of working memory" means

Related to issue #868

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

Checklist:

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas

@pieroit
Copy link
Member

pieroit commented Oct 21, 2024

Thanks @alfredotoselli will review soon

@pieroit
Copy link
Member

pieroit commented Nov 1, 2024

Hi @alfredotoselli thanks and sorry for the delay.

PR was quite good, a few notes:

  • _handle_fast_reply_message method was not necessary, if a plugin uses fast_reply there should be NO side effects, which means working memory and episodic memory are not impacted.
  • updated the tests accordingly. I found delightful the way you injected an hook inside the mad hatter; we should reason about having a folder in the tests dedicated to hook testing (all of them) using this methodology.

@pieroit pieroit merged commit a3cb888 into cheshire-cat-ai:develop Nov 1, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants