Skip to content

feat: add preferChatCompletions for older dual-mode models - #4083

Merged
Archit-Kumar-16 merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
feat/prefer-chat-completions
Oct 1, 2026
Merged

Archit-Kumar-16 merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
feat/prefer-chat-completions

Conversation

@Archit-Kumar-16

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

  • Add catalog field preferChatCompletions so older dual-mode models keep Chat Completions on /chat/completions unless the existing header, reasoning, or Cursor trigger fires.
  • Backfill the field on older dual-mode models across openai, azure-open-ai, microsoft-foundry, aws-bedrock-mantle, aws-bedrock, and databricks.
  • Omit the field on gpt-5.4+ (and newer) so inbound Chat Completions is always served via Responses.

GPT audit: every older dual-mode GPT model that lists both chat and responses now has the field. gpt-5.4+ dual-mode GPT models do not. Chat-only GPT models (openrouter, azure-ai-foundry, cerebras, sambanova, and chat-only snapshots) do not need it because they are not Responses-capable.

Test plan

  • Confirm CUE validation still accepts model YAML with preferChatCompletions: true
  • Spot-check gpt-4o / gpt-5 / gpt-5.2 have the field; gpt-5.4 / gpt-5.6-sol / gpt-6 do not
  • Confirm databricks hyphenated ids: databricks-gpt-5 has the field, databricks-gpt-5-4 does not
  • Pair with the gateway PR that reads this field

Made with Cursor

Archit-Kumar-16 and others added 2 commits September 30, 2026 11:19
New catalog entries omit this flag so Chat Completions is served via Responses. Older dual-mode models, including GPT before 5.4, set it so inbound CC stays on /chat/completions unless an existing trigger fires.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…hat API.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@Archit-Kumar-16
Archit-Kumar-16 merged commit d2d47fb into main Oct 1, 2026
4 checks passed
@Archit-Kumar-16
Archit-Kumar-16 deleted the feat/prefer-chat-completions branch October 1, 2026 13:53
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