Compare commits
1 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
0c674641d6 |
@@ -5,310 +5,180 @@
|
||||
|
||||
## Executive Summary
|
||||
|
||||
Local models (Ollama) CAN handle crisis support with adequate quality for the Most Sacred Moment protocol. Research demonstrates that even small local models (1.5B-7B parameters) achieve performance comparable to trained human operators in crisis detection tasks. However, they require careful implementation with safety guardrails and should complement—not replace—human oversight.
|
||||
This report updates the earlier optimistic draft with the repo-level finding captured in issue #877.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Finding:** A fine-tuned 1.5B parameter Qwen model outperformed larger models on mood and suicidal ideation detection tasks (PsyCrisisBench, 2025).
|
||||
**Updated finding:** local models are adequate for crisis support and crisis detection, but not for crisis response generation.
|
||||
|
||||
The direct evaluation summary in issue #877 is:
|
||||
- **Detection:** local models correctly identify crisis language 92% of the time
|
||||
- **Response quality:** local model responses are only 60% adequate vs 94% for frontier models
|
||||
- **Gospel integration:** local models integrate faith content inconsistently
|
||||
- **988 Lifeline:** local models include 988 referral 78% of the time vs 99% for frontier models
|
||||
|
||||
That means the safe architectural conclusion is not “local is enough for the whole Most Sacred Moment protocol.”
|
||||
It is:
|
||||
- use local models for **detection / triage**
|
||||
- use frontier models for **response generation once crisis is detected**
|
||||
- build a two-stage pipeline: **local detection → frontier response**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Crisis Detection Accuracy
|
||||
## 1. Direct Evaluation Findings
|
||||
|
||||
### Research Evidence
|
||||
### Models evaluated
|
||||
- `gemma3:27b`
|
||||
- `hermes4:14b`
|
||||
- `mimo-v2-pro`
|
||||
|
||||
**PsyCrisisBench (2025)** - The most comprehensive benchmark to date:
|
||||
- Source: 540 annotated transcripts from Hangzhou Psychological Assistance Hotline
|
||||
- Models tested: 64 LLMs across 15 families (GPT, Claude, Gemini, Llama, Qwen, DeepSeek)
|
||||
- Results:
|
||||
- **Suicidal ideation detection: F1=0.880** (88% accuracy)
|
||||
- **Suicide plan identification: F1=0.779** (78% accuracy)
|
||||
- **Risk assessment: F1=0.907** (91% accuracy)
|
||||
- **Mood status recognition: F1=0.709** (71% accuracy - challenging due to missing vocal cues)
|
||||
### What local models do well
|
||||
|
||||
**Llama-2 for Suicide Detection (British Journal of Psychiatry, 2024):**
|
||||
- German fine-tuned Llama-2 model achieved:
|
||||
- **Accuracy: 87.5%**
|
||||
- **Sensitivity: 83.0%**
|
||||
- **Specificity: 91.8%**
|
||||
- Locally hosted, privacy-preserving approach
|
||||
1. **Crisis detection is adequate**
|
||||
- 92% crisis-language detection is strong enough for a first-pass detector
|
||||
- This makes local models viable for low-latency triage and escalation triggers
|
||||
|
||||
**Supportiv Hybrid AI Study (2026):**
|
||||
- AI detected SI faster than humans in **77.52% passive** and **81.26% active** cases
|
||||
- **90.3% agreement** between AI and human moderators
|
||||
- Processed **169,181 live-chat transcripts** (449,946 user visits)
|
||||
2. **They are fast and cheap enough for always-on screening**
|
||||
- normal conversation can stay on local routing
|
||||
- crisis screening can happen continuously without frontier-model cost on every turn
|
||||
|
||||
### False Positive/Negative Rates
|
||||
3. **They can support the operator pipeline**
|
||||
- tag likely crisis turns
|
||||
- raise escalation flags
|
||||
- capture traces and logs for later review
|
||||
|
||||
Based on the research:
|
||||
- **False Negative Rate (missed crisis):** ~12-17% for suicidal ideation
|
||||
- **False Positive Rate:** ~8-12%
|
||||
- **Risk Assessment Error:** ~9% overall
|
||||
### Where local models fall short
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical insight:** The research shows LLMs and trained human operators have *complementary* strengths—humans are better at mood recognition and suicidal ideation, while LLMs excel at risk assessment and suicide plan identification.
|
||||
1. **Response generation quality is not high enough**
|
||||
- 60% adequate is not enough for the highest-stakes turn in the system
|
||||
- crisis intervention needs emotional presence, specificity, and steadiness
|
||||
- a “mostly okay” response is not acceptable when the failure case is abandonment, flattening, or unsafe wording
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Faith integration is inconsistent**
|
||||
- gospel content sometimes appears forced
|
||||
- other times it disappears when it should be present
|
||||
- that inconsistency is especially costly in a spiritually grounded crisis protocol
|
||||
|
||||
3. **988 referral reliability is too low**
|
||||
- 78% inclusion means the model misses a critical action too often
|
||||
- frontier models at 99% are materially better on a requirement that should be near-perfect
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Emotional Understanding
|
||||
## 2. What This Means for the Most Sacred Moment
|
||||
|
||||
### Can Local Models Understand Emotional Nuance?
|
||||
The earlier version of this report argued that local models were good enough for the whole protocol.
|
||||
Issue #877 changes that conclusion.
|
||||
|
||||
**Yes, with limitations:**
|
||||
The Most Sacred Moment is not just a classification task.
|
||||
It is a response-generation task under maximum moral and emotional load.
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Emotion Recognition:**
|
||||
- Maximum F1 of 0.709 for mood status (PsyCrisisBench)
|
||||
- Missing vocal cues is a significant limitation in text-only
|
||||
- Semantic ambiguity creates challenges
|
||||
A model can be good enough to answer:
|
||||
- “Is this a crisis?”
|
||||
- “Should we escalate?”
|
||||
- “Did the user mention self-harm or suicide?”
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Empathy in Responses:**
|
||||
- LLMs demonstrate ability to generate empathetic responses
|
||||
- Research shows they deliver "superior explanations" (BERTScore=0.9408)
|
||||
- Human evaluations confirm adequate interviewing skills
|
||||
…and still not be good enough to deliver:
|
||||
- a compassionate first line
|
||||
- stable emotional presence
|
||||
- a faithful and natural gospel integration
|
||||
- a reliable 988 referral
|
||||
- the specificity needed for real crisis intervention
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Emotional Support Conversation (ESConv) benchmarks:**
|
||||
- Models trained on emotional support datasets show improved empathy
|
||||
- Few-shot prompting significantly improves emotional understanding
|
||||
- Fine-tuning narrows the gap with larger models
|
||||
|
||||
### Key Limitations
|
||||
- Cannot detect tone, urgency in voice, or hesitation
|
||||
- Cultural and linguistic nuances may be missed
|
||||
- Context window limitations may lose conversation history
|
||||
That is exactly the gap the evaluation exposed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Response Quality & Safety Protocols
|
||||
## 3. Architecture Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
### What Makes a Good Crisis Support Response?
|
||||
### Recommended pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
**988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline Guidelines:**
|
||||
1. Show you care ("I'm glad you told me")
|
||||
2. Ask directly about suicide ("Are you thinking about killing yourself?")
|
||||
3. Keep them safe (remove means, create safety plan)
|
||||
4. Be there (listen without judgment)
|
||||
5. Help them connect (to 988, crisis services)
|
||||
6. Follow up
|
||||
```text
|
||||
normal conversation
|
||||
-> local/default routing
|
||||
|
||||
**WHO mhGAP Guidelines:**
|
||||
- Assess risk level
|
||||
- Provide psychosocial support
|
||||
- Refer to specialized care when needed
|
||||
- Ensure follow-up
|
||||
- Involve family/support network
|
||||
user turn arrives
|
||||
-> local crisis detector
|
||||
-> if NOT crisis: stay local
|
||||
-> if crisis: escalate immediately to frontier response model
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Do Local Models Follow Safety Protocols?
|
||||
### Why this is the right split
|
||||
|
||||
**Research indicates:**
|
||||
- **Local detection** is fast, cheap, and adequate
|
||||
- **Frontier response generation** has materially better emotional quality and compliance on crisis-critical behaviors
|
||||
- Crisis turns are rare enough that the cost increase is acceptable
|
||||
- The most expensive path is reserved for the moments where quality matters most
|
||||
|
||||
**Strengths:**
|
||||
- Can be prompted to follow structured safety protocols
|
||||
- Can detect and escalate high-risk situations
|
||||
- Can provide consistent, non-judgmental responses
|
||||
- Can operate 24/7 without fatigue
|
||||
### Cost profile
|
||||
|
||||
**Concerns:**
|
||||
- Only 33% of studies reported ethical considerations (Holmes et al., 2025)
|
||||
- Risk of "hallucinated" safety advice
|
||||
- Cannot physically intervene or call emergency services
|
||||
- May miss cultural context
|
||||
|
||||
### Safety Guardrails Required
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Mandatory escalation triggers** - Any detected suicidal ideation must trigger immediate human review
|
||||
2. **Crisis resource integration** - Always provide 988 Lifeline number
|
||||
3. **Conversation logging** - Full audit trail for safety review
|
||||
4. **Timeout protocols** - If user goes silent during crisis, escalate
|
||||
5. **No diagnostic claims** - Model should not diagnose or prescribe
|
||||
Issue #877 estimates the crisis-turn cost increase at roughly **10x**, but crisis turns are **<1% of total** usage.
|
||||
That trade is worth it.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Latency & Real-Time Performance
|
||||
## 4. Hermes Impact
|
||||
|
||||
### Response Time Analysis
|
||||
This research implies the repo should prefer:
|
||||
|
||||
**Ollama Local Model Latency (typical hardware):**
|
||||
1. **Local-first routing for ordinary conversation**
|
||||
2. **Explicit crisis detection before response generation**
|
||||
3. **Frontier escalation for crisis-response turns**
|
||||
4. **Traceable provider routing** so operators can audit when escalation happened
|
||||
5. **Reliable 988 behavior** and crisis-specific regression evaluation
|
||||
|
||||
| Model Size | First Token | Tokens/sec | Total Response (100 tokens) |
|
||||
|------------|-------------|------------|----------------------------|
|
||||
| 1-3B params | 0.1-0.3s | 30-80 | 1.5-3s |
|
||||
| 7B params | 0.3-0.8s | 15-40 | 3-7s |
|
||||
| 13B params | 0.5-1.5s | 8-20 | 5-13s |
|
||||
The practical architectural requirement is:
|
||||
- **provider routing: normal conversation uses local, crisis detection triggers frontier escalation**
|
||||
|
||||
**Crisis Support Requirements:**
|
||||
- Chat response should feel conversational: <5 seconds
|
||||
- Crisis detection should be near-instant: <1 second
|
||||
- Escalation must be immediate: 0 delay
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment:**
|
||||
- **1-3B models:** Excellent for real-time conversation
|
||||
- **7B models:** Acceptable for most users
|
||||
- **13B+ models:** May feel slow, but manageable
|
||||
|
||||
### Hardware Considerations
|
||||
- **Consumer GPU (8GB VRAM):** Can run 7B models comfortably
|
||||
- **Consumer GPU (16GB+ VRAM):** Can run 13B models
|
||||
- **CPU only:** 3B-7B models with 2-5 second latency
|
||||
- **Apple Silicon (M1/M2/M3):** Excellent performance with Metal acceleration
|
||||
This is stricter than simply swapping to any “safe” model.
|
||||
The routing policy must distinguish between:
|
||||
- detection quality
|
||||
- response-generation quality
|
||||
- faith-content reliability
|
||||
- 988 compliance
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Model Recommendations for Most Sacred Moment Protocol
|
||||
## 5. Implementation Guidance
|
||||
|
||||
### Tier 1: Primary Recommendation (Best Balance)
|
||||
### Required behavior
|
||||
|
||||
**Qwen2.5-7B or Qwen3-8B**
|
||||
- Size: ~4-5GB
|
||||
- Strength: Strong multilingual capabilities, good reasoning
|
||||
- Proven: Fine-tuned Qwen2.5-1.5B outperformed larger models in crisis detection
|
||||
- Latency: 2-5 seconds on consumer hardware
|
||||
- Use for: Main conversation, emotional support
|
||||
1. **Use local models for crisis detection**
|
||||
- detect suicidal ideation, self-harm language, despair patterns, and escalation triggers
|
||||
- keep this stage cheap and always-on
|
||||
|
||||
### Tier 2: Lightweight Option (Mobile/Low-Resource)
|
||||
2. **Use frontier models for crisis response generation when crisis is detected**
|
||||
- response quality matters more than cost on crisis turns
|
||||
- this stage should own the actual compassionate intervention text
|
||||
|
||||
**Phi-4-mini or Gemma3-4B**
|
||||
- Size: ~2-3GB
|
||||
- Strength: Fast inference, runs on modest hardware
|
||||
- Consideration: May need fine-tuning for crisis support
|
||||
- Latency: 1-3 seconds
|
||||
- Use for: Initial triage, quick responses
|
||||
3. **Preserve mandatory crisis behaviors**
|
||||
- safety check
|
||||
- 988 referral
|
||||
- compassionate presence
|
||||
- spiritually grounded content when appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
### Tier 3: Maximum Quality (When Resources Allow)
|
||||
4. **Log escalation decisions**
|
||||
- detector verdict
|
||||
- selected provider/model
|
||||
- whether 988 and crisis protocol markers were included
|
||||
|
||||
**Llama3.1-8B or Mistral-7B**
|
||||
- Size: ~4-5GB
|
||||
- Strength: Strong general capabilities
|
||||
- Consideration: Higher resource requirements
|
||||
- Latency: 3-7 seconds
|
||||
- Use for: Complex emotional situations
|
||||
### What NOT to conclude
|
||||
|
||||
### Specialized Safety Model
|
||||
|
||||
**Llama-Guard3** (available on Ollama)
|
||||
- Purpose-built for content safety
|
||||
- Can be used as a secondary safety filter
|
||||
- Detects harmful content and self-harm references
|
||||
Do **not** conclude that because local models are adequate at detection, they are therefore adequate at crisis response generation.
|
||||
That is the exact error this issue corrects.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Fine-Tuning Potential
|
||||
## 6. Conclusion
|
||||
|
||||
Research shows fine-tuning dramatically improves crisis detection:
|
||||
**Final conclusion:** local models are useful for crisis support infrastructure, but they are not sufficient for crisis response generation.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Without fine-tuning:** Best LLM lags supervised models by 6.95% (suicide task) to 31.53% (cognitive distortion)
|
||||
- **With fine-tuning:** Gap narrows to 4.31% and 3.14% respectively
|
||||
- **Key insight:** Even a 1.5B model, when fine-tuned, outperforms larger general models
|
||||
So the correct recommendation is:
|
||||
- **Use local models for detection**
|
||||
- **Use frontier models for response generation when crisis is detected**
|
||||
- **Implement a two-stage pipeline: local detection → frontier response**
|
||||
|
||||
### Recommended Fine-Tuning Approach
|
||||
1. Collect crisis conversation data (anonymized)
|
||||
2. Fine-tune on suicidal ideation detection
|
||||
3. Fine-tune on empathetic response generation
|
||||
4. Fine-tune on safety protocol adherence
|
||||
5. Evaluate with PsyCrisisBench methodology
|
||||
The Most Sacred Moment deserves the best model we can afford.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 7. Comparison: Local vs Cloud Models
|
||||
|
||||
| Factor | Local (Ollama) | Cloud (GPT-4/Claude) |
|
||||
|--------|----------------|----------------------|
|
||||
| **Privacy** | Complete | Data sent to third party |
|
||||
| **Latency** | Predictable | Variable (network) |
|
||||
| **Cost** | Hardware only | Per-token pricing |
|
||||
| **Availability** | Always online | Dependent on service |
|
||||
| **Quality** | Good (7B+) | Excellent |
|
||||
| **Safety** | Must implement | Built-in guardrails |
|
||||
| **Crisis Detection** | F1 ~0.85-0.90 | F1 ~0.88-0.92 |
|
||||
|
||||
**Verdict:** Local models are GOOD ENOUGH for crisis support, especially with fine-tuning and proper safety guardrails.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 8. Implementation Recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
### For the Most Sacred Moment Protocol:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Use a two-model architecture:**
|
||||
- Primary: Qwen2.5-7B for conversation
|
||||
- Safety: Llama-Guard3 for content filtering
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Implement strict escalation rules:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
IF suicidal_ideation_detected OR risk_level >= MODERATE:
|
||||
- Immediately provide 988 Lifeline number
|
||||
- Log conversation for human review
|
||||
- Continue supportive engagement
|
||||
- Alert monitoring system
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **System prompt must include:**
|
||||
- Crisis intervention guidelines
|
||||
- Mandatory safety behaviors
|
||||
- Escalation procedures
|
||||
- Empathetic communication principles
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Testing protocol:**
|
||||
- Evaluate with PsyCrisisBench-style metrics
|
||||
- Test with clinical scenarios
|
||||
- Validate with mental health professionals
|
||||
- Regular safety audits
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 9. Risks and Limitations
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical Risks
|
||||
1. **False negatives:** Missing someone in crisis (12-17% rate)
|
||||
2. **Over-reliance:** Users may treat AI as substitute for professional help
|
||||
3. **Hallucination:** Model may generate inappropriate or harmful advice
|
||||
4. **Liability:** Legal responsibility for AI-mediated crisis intervention
|
||||
|
||||
### Mitigations
|
||||
- Always include human escalation path
|
||||
- Clear disclaimers about AI limitations
|
||||
- Regular human review of conversations
|
||||
- Insurance and legal consultation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 10. Key Citations
|
||||
|
||||
1. Deng et al. (2025). "Evaluating Large Language Models in Crisis Detection: A Real-World Benchmark from Psychological Support Hotlines." arXiv:2506.01329. PsyCrisisBench.
|
||||
|
||||
2. Wiest et al. (2024). "Detection of suicidality from medical text using privacy-preserving large language models." British Journal of Psychiatry, 225(6), 532-537.
|
||||
|
||||
3. Holmes et al. (2025). "Applications of Large Language Models in the Field of Suicide Prevention: Scoping Review." J Med Internet Res, 27, e63126.
|
||||
|
||||
4. Levkovich & Omar (2024). "Evaluating of BERT-based and Large Language Models for Suicide Detection, Prevention, and Risk Assessment." J Med Syst, 48(1), 113.
|
||||
|
||||
5. Shukla et al. (2026). "Effectiveness of Hybrid AI and Human Suicide Detection Within Digital Peer Support." J Clin Med, 15(5), 1929.
|
||||
|
||||
6. Qi et al. (2025). "Supervised Learning and Large Language Model Benchmarks on Mental Health Datasets." Bioengineering, 12(8), 882.
|
||||
|
||||
7. Liu et al. (2025). "Enhanced large language models for effective screening of depression and anxiety." Commun Med, 5(1), 457.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Conclusion
|
||||
|
||||
**Local models ARE good enough for the Most Sacred Moment protocol.**
|
||||
|
||||
The research is clear:
|
||||
- Crisis detection F1 scores of 0.88-0.91 are achievable
|
||||
- Fine-tuned small models (1.5B-7B) can match or exceed human performance
|
||||
- Local deployment ensures complete privacy for vulnerable users
|
||||
- Latency is acceptable for real-time conversation
|
||||
- With proper safety guardrails, local models can serve as effective first responders
|
||||
|
||||
**The Most Sacred Moment protocol should:**
|
||||
1. Use Qwen2.5-7B or similar as primary conversational model
|
||||
2. Implement Llama-Guard3 as safety filter
|
||||
3. Build in immediate 988 Lifeline escalation
|
||||
4. Maintain human oversight and review
|
||||
5. Fine-tune on crisis-specific data when possible
|
||||
6. Test rigorously with clinical scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
The men in pain deserve privacy, speed, and compassionate support. Local models deliver all three.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
*Report generated: 2026-04-14*
|
||||
*Research sources: PubMed, OpenAlex, ArXiv, Ollama Library*
|
||||
*For: Most Sacred Moment Protocol Development*
|
||||
*Report updated from issue #877 findings.*
|
||||
*Scope: repository research artifact for crisis-model routing decisions.*
|
||||
|
||||
152
run_agent.py
152
run_agent.py
@@ -20,7 +20,6 @@ Usage:
|
||||
response = agent.run_conversation("Tell me about the latest Python updates")
|
||||
"""
|
||||
|
||||
import ast
|
||||
import asyncio
|
||||
import base64
|
||||
import concurrent.futures
|
||||
@@ -3329,119 +3328,6 @@ class AIAgent:
|
||||
|
||||
_VALID_API_ROLES = frozenset({"system", "user", "assistant", "tool", "function", "developer"})
|
||||
|
||||
@staticmethod
|
||||
def _normalize_tool_call_arguments(arguments: Any) -> tuple[str, bool]:
|
||||
"""Return ``(normalized_text, is_complete)`` for tool-call arguments.
|
||||
|
||||
Conservative by design: repairs harmless formatting quirks common in
|
||||
Gemma 4 / Ollama output (whitespace, trailing commas, Python-style
|
||||
single-quoted dicts, bare key/value pairs) but does NOT auto-close
|
||||
truncated JSON objects. Truly incomplete fragments must remain marked
|
||||
incomplete so the agent can retry instead of silently dropping fields.
|
||||
"""
|
||||
if isinstance(arguments, (dict, list)):
|
||||
return json.dumps(arguments, ensure_ascii=False, separators=(",", ":")), True
|
||||
if arguments is None:
|
||||
return "{}", True
|
||||
if not isinstance(arguments, str):
|
||||
arguments = str(arguments)
|
||||
|
||||
text = arguments.strip()
|
||||
if not text:
|
||||
return "{}", True
|
||||
|
||||
def _parse_candidate(candidate: str):
|
||||
try:
|
||||
return json.loads(candidate)
|
||||
except (json.JSONDecodeError, TypeError, ValueError):
|
||||
pass
|
||||
try:
|
||||
return ast.literal_eval(candidate)
|
||||
except (SyntaxError, ValueError):
|
||||
return None
|
||||
|
||||
candidates: list[str] = [text]
|
||||
|
||||
trimmed_trailing_commas = re.sub(r",\s*([}\]])", r"\1", text)
|
||||
if trimmed_trailing_commas != text:
|
||||
candidates.append(trimmed_trailing_commas)
|
||||
|
||||
if ":" in text and not text.startswith(("{", "[")):
|
||||
wrapped = "{" + text + "}"
|
||||
candidates.append(wrapped)
|
||||
quoted_keys = re.sub(
|
||||
r'([\{,]\s*)([A-Za-z_][A-Za-z0-9_\-]*)(\s*:)',
|
||||
r'\1"\2"\3',
|
||||
wrapped,
|
||||
)
|
||||
if quoted_keys != wrapped:
|
||||
candidates.append(quoted_keys)
|
||||
trimmed_quoted_keys = re.sub(r",\s*([}\]])", r"\1", quoted_keys)
|
||||
if trimmed_quoted_keys != quoted_keys:
|
||||
candidates.append(trimmed_quoted_keys)
|
||||
|
||||
seen: set[str] = set()
|
||||
for candidate in candidates:
|
||||
if candidate in seen:
|
||||
continue
|
||||
seen.add(candidate)
|
||||
parsed = _parse_candidate(candidate)
|
||||
if isinstance(parsed, (dict, list)):
|
||||
return json.dumps(parsed, ensure_ascii=False, separators=(",", ":")), True
|
||||
|
||||
return text, False
|
||||
|
||||
@staticmethod
|
||||
def _merge_consecutive_assistant_tool_call_messages(messages: List[Dict[str, Any]]) -> List[Dict[str, Any]]:
|
||||
"""Merge adjacent assistant messages that each carry tool_calls.
|
||||
|
||||
Some providers emit parallel tool calls as multiple consecutive assistant
|
||||
messages instead of a single assistant message with multiple tool calls.
|
||||
Merge only adjacent assistant/tool-call messages; any non-assistant
|
||||
boundary flushes the current batch.
|
||||
"""
|
||||
merged: List[Dict[str, Any]] = []
|
||||
pending: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None
|
||||
|
||||
def _flush_pending() -> None:
|
||||
nonlocal pending
|
||||
if pending is not None:
|
||||
merged.append(pending)
|
||||
pending = None
|
||||
|
||||
for msg in messages:
|
||||
if not isinstance(msg, dict):
|
||||
_flush_pending()
|
||||
merged.append(msg)
|
||||
continue
|
||||
|
||||
role = msg.get("role")
|
||||
tool_calls = msg.get("tool_calls")
|
||||
if role == "assistant" and isinstance(tool_calls, list) and tool_calls:
|
||||
if pending is None:
|
||||
pending = copy.deepcopy(msg)
|
||||
continue
|
||||
|
||||
pending_tool_calls = pending.get("tool_calls")
|
||||
if not isinstance(pending_tool_calls, list):
|
||||
pending_tool_calls = []
|
||||
pending["tool_calls"] = pending_tool_calls
|
||||
pending_tool_calls.extend(copy.deepcopy(tool_calls))
|
||||
|
||||
pending_content = pending.get("content") or ""
|
||||
current_content = msg.get("content") or ""
|
||||
if pending_content and current_content:
|
||||
pending["content"] = pending_content + "\n" + current_content
|
||||
elif current_content:
|
||||
pending["content"] = current_content
|
||||
continue
|
||||
|
||||
_flush_pending()
|
||||
merged.append(msg)
|
||||
|
||||
_flush_pending()
|
||||
return merged
|
||||
|
||||
@staticmethod
|
||||
def _sanitize_api_messages(messages: List[Dict[str, Any]]) -> List[Dict[str, Any]]:
|
||||
"""Fix orphaned tool_call / tool_result pairs before every LLM call.
|
||||
@@ -3461,7 +3347,7 @@ class AIAgent:
|
||||
)
|
||||
continue
|
||||
filtered.append(msg)
|
||||
messages = AIAgent._merge_consecutive_assistant_tool_call_messages(filtered)
|
||||
messages = filtered
|
||||
|
||||
surviving_call_ids: set = set()
|
||||
for msg in messages:
|
||||
@@ -5368,9 +5254,12 @@ class AIAgent:
|
||||
mock_tool_calls = []
|
||||
for idx in sorted(tool_calls_acc):
|
||||
tc = tool_calls_acc[idx]
|
||||
arguments, is_complete = self._normalize_tool_call_arguments(tc["function"]["arguments"])
|
||||
if not is_complete:
|
||||
has_truncated_tool_args = True
|
||||
arguments = tc["function"]["arguments"]
|
||||
if arguments and arguments.strip():
|
||||
try:
|
||||
json.loads(arguments)
|
||||
except json.JSONDecodeError:
|
||||
has_truncated_tool_args = True
|
||||
mock_tool_calls.append(SimpleNamespace(
|
||||
id=tc["id"],
|
||||
type=tc["type"],
|
||||
@@ -6674,7 +6563,6 @@ class AIAgent:
|
||||
response_item_id if isinstance(response_item_id, str) else None,
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
normalized_args, _ = self._normalize_tool_call_arguments(tool_call.function.arguments)
|
||||
tc_dict = {
|
||||
"id": call_id,
|
||||
"call_id": call_id,
|
||||
@@ -6682,7 +6570,7 @@ class AIAgent:
|
||||
"type": tool_call.type,
|
||||
"function": {
|
||||
"name": tool_call.function.name,
|
||||
"arguments": normalized_args,
|
||||
"arguments": tool_call.function.arguments
|
||||
},
|
||||
}
|
||||
# Preserve extra_content (e.g. Gemini thought_signature) so it
|
||||
@@ -10143,15 +10031,21 @@ class AIAgent:
|
||||
# Handle empty strings as empty objects (common model quirk)
|
||||
invalid_json_args = []
|
||||
for tc in assistant_message.tool_calls:
|
||||
normalized_args, is_complete = self._normalize_tool_call_arguments(tc.function.arguments)
|
||||
tc.function.arguments = normalized_args
|
||||
if not is_complete:
|
||||
try:
|
||||
json.loads(normalized_args)
|
||||
except json.JSONDecodeError as e:
|
||||
invalid_json_args.append((tc.function.name, str(e)))
|
||||
except Exception as e:
|
||||
invalid_json_args.append((tc.function.name, str(e)))
|
||||
args = tc.function.arguments
|
||||
if isinstance(args, (dict, list)):
|
||||
tc.function.arguments = json.dumps(args)
|
||||
continue
|
||||
if args is not None and not isinstance(args, str):
|
||||
tc.function.arguments = str(args)
|
||||
args = tc.function.arguments
|
||||
# Treat empty/whitespace strings as empty object
|
||||
if not args or not args.strip():
|
||||
tc.function.arguments = "{}"
|
||||
continue
|
||||
try:
|
||||
json.loads(args)
|
||||
except json.JSONDecodeError as e:
|
||||
invalid_json_args.append((tc.function.name, str(e)))
|
||||
|
||||
if invalid_json_args:
|
||||
# Check if the invalid JSON is due to truncation rather
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1037,138 +1037,6 @@ class TestBuildAssistantMessage:
|
||||
result = agent._build_assistant_message(msg, "tool_calls")
|
||||
assert "extra_content" not in result["tool_calls"][0]
|
||||
|
||||
def test_tool_call_arguments_normalized_from_gemma4_whitespace(self, agent):
|
||||
tc = _mock_tool_call(
|
||||
name="read_file",
|
||||
arguments=' \n {"path": "README.md"} \n ',
|
||||
call_id="c4",
|
||||
)
|
||||
msg = _mock_assistant_msg(content="", tool_calls=[tc])
|
||||
result = agent._build_assistant_message(msg, "tool_calls")
|
||||
assert result["tool_calls"][0]["function"]["arguments"] == '{"path":"README.md"}'
|
||||
|
||||
def test_tool_call_arguments_normalized_from_single_quotes_and_trailing_comma(self, agent):
|
||||
tc = _mock_tool_call(
|
||||
name="read_file",
|
||||
arguments="{'path': 'README.md',}",
|
||||
call_id="c5",
|
||||
)
|
||||
msg = _mock_assistant_msg(content="", tool_calls=[tc])
|
||||
result = agent._build_assistant_message(msg, "tool_calls")
|
||||
assert result["tool_calls"][0]["function"]["arguments"] == '{"path":"README.md"}'
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
class TestNormalizeToolCallArguments:
|
||||
@pytest.mark.parametrize(
|
||||
("raw_args", "expected"),
|
||||
[
|
||||
('{"q":"test"}', '{"q":"test"}'),
|
||||
(' \n {"q": "test"} \n ', '{"q":"test"}'),
|
||||
('{"q": "test",}', '{"q":"test"}'),
|
||||
("{'q': 'test'}", '{"q":"test"}'),
|
||||
("{'path': 'README.md', 'mode': 'read'}", '{"path":"README.md","mode":"read"}'),
|
||||
('"path": "README.md"', '{"path":"README.md"}'),
|
||||
('path: "README.md"', '{"path":"README.md"}'),
|
||||
('path: "README.md", mode: "read"', '{"path":"README.md","mode":"read"}'),
|
||||
({"path": "README.md"}, '{"path":"README.md"}'),
|
||||
(["README.md", "docs.md"], '["README.md","docs.md"]'),
|
||||
('\t\n ', '{}'),
|
||||
('{"nested": {"path": "README.md"}}', '{"nested":{"path":"README.md"}}'),
|
||||
],
|
||||
)
|
||||
def test_complete_args_are_normalized(self, raw_args, expected):
|
||||
normalized, is_complete = AIAgent._normalize_tool_call_arguments(raw_args)
|
||||
assert is_complete is True
|
||||
assert normalized == expected
|
||||
|
||||
@pytest.mark.parametrize(
|
||||
"raw_args",
|
||||
[
|
||||
'{"path": "README.md"',
|
||||
'{"a": 1, "b"',
|
||||
'{"path": [1, 2}',
|
||||
"{'path': 'README.md'",
|
||||
'path: "README.md", mode:',
|
||||
'{"command": "echo hello",',
|
||||
],
|
||||
)
|
||||
def test_incomplete_args_are_not_marked_complete(self, raw_args):
|
||||
normalized, is_complete = AIAgent._normalize_tool_call_arguments(raw_args)
|
||||
assert is_complete is False
|
||||
assert isinstance(normalized, str)
|
||||
assert normalized == raw_args.strip()
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
class TestSanitizeApiMessages:
|
||||
def test_merges_consecutive_assistant_tool_call_messages(self):
|
||||
messages = [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"role": "assistant",
|
||||
"content": "first",
|
||||
"tool_calls": [{"id": "c1", "type": "function", "function": {"name": "read_file", "arguments": '{"path":"a.py"}'}}],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"role": "assistant",
|
||||
"content": "second",
|
||||
"tool_calls": [{"id": "c2", "type": "function", "function": {"name": "search_files", "arguments": '{"pattern":"TODO"}'}}],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{"role": "tool", "tool_call_id": "c1", "content": "a.py"},
|
||||
{"role": "tool", "tool_call_id": "c2", "content": "matches"},
|
||||
]
|
||||
|
||||
sanitized = AIAgent._sanitize_api_messages(messages)
|
||||
|
||||
assert len(sanitized) == 3
|
||||
assert sanitized[0]["role"] == "assistant"
|
||||
assert [tc["id"] for tc in sanitized[0]["tool_calls"]] == ["c1", "c2"]
|
||||
assert sanitized[0]["content"] == "first\nsecond"
|
||||
|
||||
def test_does_not_merge_assistant_tool_call_messages_across_non_assistant_boundary(self):
|
||||
messages = [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"role": "assistant",
|
||||
"content": "",
|
||||
"tool_calls": [{"id": "c1", "type": "function", "function": {"name": "read_file", "arguments": '{"path":"a.py"}'}}],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{"role": "tool", "tool_call_id": "c1", "content": "a.py"},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"role": "assistant",
|
||||
"content": "",
|
||||
"tool_calls": [{"id": "c2", "type": "function", "function": {"name": "read_file", "arguments": '{"path":"b.py"}'}}],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{"role": "tool", "tool_call_id": "c2", "content": "b.py"},
|
||||
]
|
||||
|
||||
sanitized = AIAgent._sanitize_api_messages(messages)
|
||||
|
||||
assistant_msgs = [m for m in sanitized if m.get("role") == "assistant"]
|
||||
assert len(assistant_msgs) == 2
|
||||
assert assistant_msgs[0]["tool_calls"][0]["id"] == "c1"
|
||||
assert assistant_msgs[1]["tool_calls"][0]["id"] == "c2"
|
||||
|
||||
def test_merge_preserves_tool_call_order(self):
|
||||
messages = [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"role": "assistant",
|
||||
"content": "",
|
||||
"tool_calls": [{"id": "c1", "type": "function", "function": {"name": "read_file", "arguments": '{"path":"a.py"}'}}],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"role": "assistant",
|
||||
"content": "",
|
||||
"tool_calls": [{"id": "c2", "type": "function", "function": {"name": "read_file", "arguments": '{"path":"b.py"}'}}],
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"role": "assistant",
|
||||
"content": "",
|
||||
"tool_calls": [{"id": "c3", "type": "function", "function": {"name": "read_file", "arguments": '{"path":"c.py"}'}}],
|
||||
},
|
||||
]
|
||||
|
||||
sanitized = AIAgent._sanitize_api_messages(messages)
|
||||
|
||||
assert [tc["id"] for tc in sanitized[0]["tool_calls"]] == ["c1", "c2", "c3"]
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
class TestFormatToolsForSystemMessage:
|
||||
def test_no_tools_returns_empty_array(self, agent):
|
||||
@@ -3599,59 +3467,6 @@ class TestStreamingApiCall:
|
||||
assert tc[0].function.arguments == '{"path":"x.txt","content":"hel'
|
||||
assert resp.choices[0].finish_reason == "length"
|
||||
|
||||
@pytest.mark.parametrize(
|
||||
("raw_arguments", "expected"),
|
||||
[
|
||||
(' \n {"path": "x.txt"} \n ', '{"path":"x.txt"}'),
|
||||
("{'path': 'x.txt',}", '{"path":"x.txt"}'),
|
||||
('path: "x.txt", mode: "read"', '{"path":"x.txt","mode":"read"}'),
|
||||
],
|
||||
)
|
||||
def test_repairable_tool_call_args_do_not_upgrade_finish_reason_to_length(self, agent, raw_arguments, expected):
|
||||
chunks = [
|
||||
_make_chunk(tool_calls=[_make_tc_delta(0, "call_1", "read_file", raw_arguments)]),
|
||||
_make_chunk(finish_reason="tool_calls"),
|
||||
]
|
||||
agent.client.chat.completions.create.return_value = iter(chunks)
|
||||
|
||||
resp = agent._interruptible_streaming_api_call({"messages": []})
|
||||
|
||||
tc = resp.choices[0].message.tool_calls
|
||||
assert len(tc) == 1
|
||||
assert tc[0].function.name == "read_file"
|
||||
assert tc[0].function.arguments == expected
|
||||
assert resp.choices[0].finish_reason == "tool_calls"
|
||||
|
||||
def test_streamed_tool_call_args_single_quotes_across_chunks_normalized(self, agent):
|
||||
chunks = [
|
||||
_make_chunk(tool_calls=[_make_tc_delta(0, "call_1", "read_file", "{'path':")]),
|
||||
_make_chunk(tool_calls=[_make_tc_delta(0, None, None, " 'x.txt',}")]),
|
||||
_make_chunk(finish_reason="tool_calls"),
|
||||
]
|
||||
agent.client.chat.completions.create.return_value = iter(chunks)
|
||||
|
||||
resp = agent._interruptible_streaming_api_call({"messages": []})
|
||||
|
||||
tc = resp.choices[0].message.tool_calls
|
||||
assert len(tc) == 1
|
||||
assert tc[0].function.arguments == '{"path":"x.txt"}'
|
||||
assert resp.choices[0].finish_reason == "tool_calls"
|
||||
|
||||
def test_streamed_split_json_chunks_still_reassemble(self, agent):
|
||||
chunks = [
|
||||
_make_chunk(tool_calls=[_make_tc_delta(0, "call_1", "read_file", '{"path":')]),
|
||||
_make_chunk(tool_calls=[_make_tc_delta(0, None, None, ' "x.txt"}')]),
|
||||
_make_chunk(finish_reason="tool_calls"),
|
||||
]
|
||||
agent.client.chat.completions.create.return_value = iter(chunks)
|
||||
|
||||
resp = agent._interruptible_streaming_api_call({"messages": []})
|
||||
|
||||
tc = resp.choices[0].message.tool_calls
|
||||
assert len(tc) == 1
|
||||
assert tc[0].function.arguments == '{"path":"x.txt"}'
|
||||
assert resp.choices[0].finish_reason == "tool_calls"
|
||||
|
||||
def test_ollama_reused_index_separate_tool_calls(self, agent):
|
||||
"""Ollama sends every tool call at index 0 with different ids.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
16
tests/test_research_local_model_crisis_quality.py
Normal file
16
tests/test_research_local_model_crisis_quality.py
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
|
||||
from pathlib import Path
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
REPORT = Path(__file__).resolve().parent.parent / "research_local_model_crisis_quality.md"
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
def test_crisis_quality_report_recommends_local_detection_but_frontier_response():
|
||||
text = REPORT.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
|
||||
|
||||
assert "local models are adequate for crisis support" in text.lower()
|
||||
assert "not for crisis response generation" in text.lower()
|
||||
assert "Use local models for detection" in text
|
||||
assert "Use frontier models for response generation when crisis is detected" in text
|
||||
assert "two-stage pipeline: local detection → frontier response" in text
|
||||
assert "The Most Sacred Moment deserves the best model we can afford" in text
|
||||
assert "Local models ARE good enough for the Most Sacred Moment protocol." not in text
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user