[BUG] CodeCompanion tools should work with relative paths.

[dyamon]

Describe the bug

The vectorcode_query tool for the CodeCompanion integration is set to return absolute paths to files, here and here.

This does not align with the general policy in CodeCompanion in which paths should be relative to the cwd. (see olimorris/codecompanion.nvim#1633).

To Reproduce

This causes failures consistently when prompting something like:

@{vectorcode_query} for files containing the definition of SomeObject and @{insert_edit_into_file} a boolean valid field.

because the @{insert_edit_into_file} tool expects a relative path.

Expected behavior

On one hand, CodeCompanion should probably be able to accept any path and then make them relative.
Still, since relative paths are the default in VectorCode, it might be easier to just remove the --absolute flag altogether.

Platform information:

OS: Linux

$ nvim -v
NVIM v0.11.3
Build type: Release
LuaJIT 2.1.1741730670

[Davidyz]

That's fair. It'll require extra prompt engineering because the vectorcode_query tool supports querying from other projects. We need to make sure it's not confused when it receives a bunch of relative paths. Maybe add an extra bit of info that tells whether the file can be accessed by other tools. I'll think about it.

[dyamon]

Ah didn't realize that at first. Yeah that kind of makes things harder. Still, here CodeCompanion should probably check if the path is actually relative before prepending a cwd.

[Davidyz]

It's more of a "coordination" issue with built-in tools in codecompanion. Personally, I don't want to sacrifice the cross-project querying. I've opened a discussion in codecompanion repo to discuss this.

[Davidyz]

Sorry for this to take longer than it needs to. For now, I've decided to use relative paths for in-project files, and absolute paths for cross-project files. This is cleaner than appending a boolean "readable" flag for every single file/chunk. If codecompanion.nvim decides to open up about IO outside of cwd, we can change the behaviour if we need to. I'll experiment with the PR more to see if the update is actually enough to get the LLM to understand the rules. Feel free to give it a try if you wish.

[dyamon]

Hey @Davidyz, thanks for this. It seems like a sensible solution. I'll definitely test it out and see how it works!