Skip to content
Discussion options

You must be logged in to vote

Checked both source claims against current master, both exact.

message.ts:238 is really the verbatim passthrough: toolCallId: input.callId, no transformation. And assembler.ts:115 is really id: partial.toolCallId ?? brandString(call-${index}) — that fallback only fires when the model gives no id at all, so it genuinely can't be the source of a repeated id like you already ruled out. I also grepped the whole llm package tree for anything resembling a uniqueness check on tool call ids (a Set, a dedup pass, anything) and found nothing at all. So "no session-wide uniqueness guarantee" isn't just plausible, it's confirmed by absence.

Worth connecting this to #1593, which argszero investigated …

Replies: 1 comment

Comment options

You must be logged in to vote
0 replies
Answer selected by lmznhq
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Category
Q&A
Labels
None yet
2 participants