Skip to content

improve routes summary#2011

Open
anubra266 wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
improve-routes-summary
Open

improve routes summary#2011
anubra266 wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
improve-routes-summary

Conversation

@anubra266
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@changeset-bot
Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Feb 14, 2026

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 60d0265

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Feb 14, 2026

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
agents-api Ready Ready Preview, Comment Feb 14, 2026 0:48am
agents-manage-ui Ready Ready Preview, Comment Feb 14, 2026 0:48am
1 Skipped Deployment
Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
agents-docs Skipped Skipped Feb 14, 2026 0:48am

Request Review

Copy link
Contributor

@claude claude bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

PR Review Summary

(1) Total Issues | Risk: Low

🟡 Minor (1) 🟡

🟡 1) functions.ts + subAgentFunctionTools.ts Terminology split: "Function Definitions" vs "Function Tools"

Issue: The PR introduces "Function Definitions" as the new name for the base entity (in functions.ts), but the relation routes in subAgentFunctionTools.ts continue to use "Function Tools". This creates a vocabulary split where the base entity is now called "Function Definition" but the assignment relation still references "Function Tool".

Why: This may confuse API consumers about whether "Function" and "Function Definition" refer to the same entity. The auto-generated API reference docs will reflect this inconsistency — the Functions page will have operations like "List Function Definitions" while the Function Tools page will have operations like "List Function Tools assigned to a SubAgent".

Fix: Consider one of:

  • Keep summaries as "List Functions", "Create Function" etc. (no change) for consistency with existing terminology
  • Apply the "Definition" pattern to Function Tools routes as well (e.g., "List Function Definitions assigned to a SubAgent")
  • Clarify in documentation that "Functions" and "Function Definitions" are the same concept

Refs:

💭 Consider (2) 💭

Inline Comments:

  • 💭 Consider: functions.ts:96 Inconsistent "by ID" suffix pattern
  • 💭 Consider: subAgentToolRelations.ts:131 Inconsistent article usage ("a/an")

💡 APPROVE WITH SUGGESTIONS

Summary: This is a thoughtful improvement to API documentation clarity. The action-verb phrasing ("Assign", "Unassign") is more intuitive than the previous CRUD-style naming, and adding "MCP" to Tools helps distinguish them from Function Tools. The main consideration is the terminology split between "Function Definitions" and "Function Tools" which could be addressed for consistency. The inline suggestions are minor stylistic nitpicks — take them or leave them as you see fit. Nice cleanup! 🎉

Discarded (3)
Location Issue Reason Discarded
multi-file Action verbs (Assign/Unassign) vs CRUD verbs pattern This is a positive improvement for user clarity, not an issue to fix
multi-file Sentence-style summaries vs terse style The new style is more descriptive and user-friendly; this is an intentional improvement
system Docs auto-generation may be stale Docs are auto-generated and will be updated by CI/CD; not a blocker
Reviewers (3)
Reviewer Returned Main Findings Consider While You're Here Inline Comments Pending Recs Discarded
pr-review-standards 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
pr-review-consistency 5 0 0 0 2 0 3
pr-review-product 3 1 0 0 0 0 2
Total 8 1 0 0 2 0 5

method: 'get',
path: '/{id}',
summary: 'Get Function by ID',
summary: 'Get Function Definition by ID',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💭 Consider: Inconsistent "by ID" suffix

Issue: This route uses "Get Function Definition by ID" while tools.ts uses "Get MCP Tool" (no "by ID" suffix). The majority of routes in the codebase omit the "by ID" suffix.

Why: Minor inconsistency within this PR and with the broader codebase pattern.

Fix: Consider removing "by ID" to match the dominant pattern:

Suggested change
summary: 'Get Function Definition by ID',
summary: 'Get Function Definition',

Refs:

method: 'get',
path: '/{id}',
summary: 'Get SubAgent Tool Relation',
summary: 'Get a SubAgent MCP Tool assignment by ID',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💭 Consider: Inconsistent article usage

Issue: This summary uses "Get a SubAgent MCP Tool assignment by ID" with an article, while most other routes omit articles (e.g., "Get SubAgent", "Get MCP Tool").

Why: Minor stylistic inconsistency with the established pattern across the codebase.

Fix: Consider removing the article for consistency:

Suggested change
summary: 'Get a SubAgent MCP Tool assignment by ID',
summary: 'Get SubAgent MCP Tool assignment by ID',

Refs:

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.

1 participant