can_disable stays true — reasoning_effort=none still lands prompt 194,
completion 3, no prose. What the retest added are two limits worth
recording: the verdict is unobservable on the non-streaming path, where
reasoning is billed but neither prose nor usage detail comes back, and
enable_thinking / thinking:{enabled} remain inert on this model.
No behaviour changed, so there is no failing test to show first. The
evidence for a declaration that still holds is the retest itself, not
a unit test the library could write about its own claim.
providers.py had been holding two jobs: the registry of what each
provider looks like, and the decisions made from those declarations.
Adding response-side judgement would have made it the module for
everything about reasoning, so the decisions move to thinking.py and
the registry keeps only profiles and their lookup.
Moving a module breaks any deep-path import of what moved, so the six
public symbols are promoted to the package root at the same time. The
top level is this library's stated API surface; giving downstream a
stable name to import is what makes the next reorganisation harmless.
observe_thinking stays unexported — downstream reads the verdict off
LLMResponse, and exporting it would be a permanent promise for nothing.
The verifier caught that the disable-direction evidence only proved "no
regression", not "actually took effect": on M3 the disabled runs and the
no-opinion baseline are identically distributed, because that model does
not reason by default anyway. So the disable runs alone cannot rule out
the very failure mode issue #5 is about -- the parameter being silently
dropped upstream. The bogus-value experiment that does rule it out was
sitting in the findings document instead of the test suite; it is now
case L3b, and the L3 assertion that could never fail is gone.
Also from the review: the e2e helper caught bare Exception, which would
have disguised a library bug as an unavailable source, exactly the
silence the reporting discipline exists to prevent; the unregistered
model warning fired on every request instead of once per source; and the
transport caught ValueError broadly enough to mislabel unrelated errors,
now narrowed to a dedicated ThinkingUnsupportedError.
The design and plan still described the original judgement criteria,
which the measurements had already overturned. Both now match what the
tests actually do, and the design no longer claims the only new failure
surface is the openai one -- dissect configures MiniMax-M2.7 with
ENABLE_THINKING=false and will fail at assembly, which has to be
coordinated before this merges.
enable_thinking=False was a no-op for minimax and openai sources: both
profiles had empty dicts on each side, so the payload update injected
nothing while the caller believed reasoning had been turned off. A
downstream project was blocked on exactly this.
The root cause is that an empty dict meant two different things -- "no
injection needed" and "we do not know how this provider spells it" --
and that a provider-level table cannot express what turned out to be a
per-model property. Live testing showed MiniMax-M3 can disable
reasoning via reasoning_effort while M2.7 and M2.5 cannot be disabled
at all, which two external registries independently confirm.
So the shape stays at provider level and a capability table joins it at
model level. Unknown, unsupported and no-opinion are now three distinct
values, and resolve_thinking is the single place they meet: it raises at
assembly time when a model cannot honour the request, warns and injects
for unregistered models, and injects silently otherwise. Every registered
capability carries the evidence it was derived from.
enable_thinking also joins the cache fingerprint, since it now really
does change the request body.
iomgaa