chore(main): release 1.497.0

[rubenfiszel]

🤖 I have created a release beep boop

1.497.0 (2025-06-16)

Features

• add api tools to ai chat (#5921) (f7a83c0)
• backend: use streamable http in favor of sse for MCP (#5910) (d47c078)
• better graph layout algorithm + migrate to svelte 5 almost everywhere + xyflow 1.0 (23920ae)
• fill runnable inputs with AI chat (#5887) (b4a6a7e)
• go: local go.mod (#5929) (0b89260)
• multiple azure models support (#5920) (f412ede)
• rust: add rust sdk (#5909) (332f66e)

Bug Fixes

• ai chat tooltip + user settings autocomplete issue (#5917) (6f907c7)
• audit logs for token refresh + consider refresh for active users (#5930) (cf2d09e)
• fix input with wrong height on first render (#5935) (1a6283b)
• flow step missing input warnings (#5916) (f077849)
• frontend: use correct kind for flow insert module btn (#5938) (17c8c8a)

---

This PR was generated with Release Please. See documentation.

---

Important

Release 1.497.0 adds new features like API tools for AI chat and a Rust SDK, and fixes various bugs including AI chat tooltip issues.

• Features:
  • Add API tools to AI chat.
  • Use streamable HTTP instead of SSE for MCP.
  • Improve graph layout algorithm, migrate to Svelte 5, and update to xyflow 1.0.
  • Fill runnable inputs with AI chat.
  • Support multiple Azure models.
  • Add Rust SDK.
  • Add local go.mod for Go.
• Bug Fixes:
  • Fix AI chat tooltip and user settings autocomplete issues.
  • Add audit logs for token refresh and consider refresh for active users.
  • Fix input height issue on first render.
  • Address flow step missing input warnings.
  • Correct kind for flow insert module button in frontend.

^{This description was created by for c8b3e49. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying windmill with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	572453f
Status:	✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL:	https://87ea7ba1.windmill.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL:	https://release-please--branches--ma.windmill.pages.dev

View logs

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed everything up to 99686ed in 38 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 24 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Verify that the version bump to 1.497.0 in version.txt aligns with the changelog update.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_Tzf5KRBCUtLtv1GN

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed cdec47d in 36 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 25 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump to 1.497.0 is correct and consistent with the changelog.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_O1X8JudYwbB3yZiM

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed fe29149 in 4 minutes and 36 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 26 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 3 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump to 1.497.0 is correct and aligns with the changelog.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:8

• Draft comment:
  Consider capitalizing acronyms for clarity: 'http' should be 'HTTP' and 'sse' should be 'SSE'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about capitalization in a changelog, which is not a code change or logic issue. The rules say not to make purely informative or stylistic comments unless they are actionable code quality refactors. This is not actionable in the sense of code quality, just a style suggestion for a markdown file. There is no strong evidence that this is required or that it would cause any issue if left as is. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize code changes and actionable refactors, not documentation style. Even if documentation style is important, the rules are clear that such comments should not be made unless they are actionable code quality refactors, which this is not. This comment should be deleted because it is a purely stylistic suggestion in a changelog and not an actionable code change or refactor.

3. CHANGELOG.md:10

• Draft comment:
  Consider capitalizing the abbreviation 'sdk' to 'SDK' for consistency with common usage.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The rules specify not to make purely informative or unimportant comments. This suggestion is about capitalization, which is a minor style issue and does not impact code logic or correctness. There is no strong evidence that this change is required, and it does not address a functional issue. Perhaps consistent capitalization is important for documentation quality, but the rules prioritize actionable, necessary changes over minor style suggestions. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that minor, non-essential style suggestions should not be commented on unless they are critical. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor, non-essential style suggestion and does not require a code change.

Workflow ID: wflow_0YgVO88Ycomx0tRK

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 89268f0 in 2 minutes and 26 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 27 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 4 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version number updated to 1.497.0 as expected for this release.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:8

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: Consider capitalizing the acronyms "HTTP" and "SSE" instead of "http" and "sse" in the bullet point.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This is a purely typographical suggestion in a changelog file, not in code. The rules say not to make comments unless a code change is required, and not to make unimportant or purely informative comments. Capitalization of acronyms in a changelog is not critical and does not impact code quality or functionality. Therefore, this comment should be removed. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes and not minor typographical issues in non-code files. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such minor typographical suggestions in changelogs are not actionable enough to warrant a review comment. This comment should be deleted as it is not actionable, not about code, and does not require a code change.

3. CHANGELOG.md:9

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: "svelte" should likely be capitalized to "Svelte" as it is a proper noun.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This is a minor typographical suggestion in a changelog, not in code. The rules discourage comments that are purely informative or unimportant, and this does not require a code change. It is not a logic or code quality issue, nor does it affect functionality. The changelog is not a place where such minor style corrections are critical. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes and logic issues. This is not actionable in the sense required by the rules. Even if consistency is nice, the rules are clear that such minor, non-code, non-logic, non-actionable comments should be omitted. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor, non-actionable typographical suggestion in a changelog and does not meet the criteria for a useful review comment.

4. CHANGELOG.md:11

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: Consider capitalizing "rust sdk" to "Rust SDK".
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about a typographical improvement in a changelog file, not about code logic. The rules explicitly say not to make purely informative or typographical comments unless they are critical. This change is not critical to code logic or functionality. Perhaps consistent capitalization in changelogs is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over style or typographical suggestions. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that typographical suggestions alone are not sufficient reason to comment unless they impact code logic. This comment should be deleted because it is a purely typographical suggestion and does not require a code change.

Workflow ID: wflow_WHm5j6b1N6TkuBsw

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 3f33169 in 49 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 27 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version updated to 1.497.0; ensure this aligns with the release changelog and tagging strategy.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_5R73NtI7Efg0F8xA

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 75bca57 in 1 minute and 43 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 32 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 4 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump updated to 1.497.0. Ensure consistency with other version metadata if applicable.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:8

• Draft comment:
  Typographical note: Consider capitalizing the acronyms, e.g. change "http" to "HTTP" and "sse" to "SSE" for clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about a stylistic change (capitalization) in a changelog file, which is not a code logic issue. The rules explicitly state not to make comments unless a code change is required and to avoid unimportant or purely informative comments. This suggestion does not impact functionality or code quality. Perhaps consistent capitalization could be important for documentation quality, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic or typographical suggestions. Even if documentation consistency is valuable, the rules are clear that such comments should not be made unless a code change is required. This is not the case here. The comment should be deleted as it is purely typographical and not actionable per the rules.

3. CHANGELOG.md:9

• Draft comment:
  Typographical note: If referring to the Svelte framework, consider capitalizing "svelte" to "Svelte".
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This is a minor typographical suggestion in a changelog, not a code file. The rules say not to make purely informative or unimportant comments, and this is not a code change requirement. There is no strong evidence that this is a required change, and it does not affect code logic or quality. It is not actionable in the sense required by the rules. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over style in changelogs. The comment does not address a code issue or a logic bug. Even if style consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such minor, non-actionable comments should not be kept. This is not a code change requirement. The comment should be deleted as it is a minor, non-actionable style suggestion in a changelog and not a required code change.

4. CHANGELOG.md:16

• Draft comment:
  Typographical note: For consistency, consider capitalizing "ai" to "AI" in "ai chat tooltip".
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is purely about capitalization in a changelog entry, which is not a code logic or actionable code quality issue. The rules explicitly say not to make unimportant or purely informative comments. There is no strong evidence that this is a necessary change, and it does not impact the codebase's functionality or quality. It is not actionable in the sense required by the rules. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable, code-relevant comments. This is a documentation nitpick, not a required change. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such minor, non-code, non-actionable comments should not be kept. This comment should be deleted as it is not actionable, important, or related to code logic. It is a minor stylistic suggestion in documentation.

Workflow ID: wflow_ZhKNVsysgzKrNGB3

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 5eed398 in 1 minute and 46 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 33 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 3 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version updated to 1.497.0. Confirm consistency with release documents.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:9

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The framework name 'svelte' should be capitalized as 'Svelte' for consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The rules specify not to make purely informative comments or comments about unimportant issues. Capitalization in a changelog is not a code logic issue and does not require a code change. This is a minor stylistic suggestion and does not impact functionality or code quality. The comment does not meet the threshold for requiring a code change. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic suggestions in documentation. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that only actionable code changes should be commented on, and this does not qualify. The comment should be deleted as it is a purely informative, stylistic suggestion and not a required code change.

3. CHANGELOG.md:17

• Draft comment:
  Inconsistency: 'ai chat' is written in lowercase here, whereas it's capitalized as 'AI chat' in another feature bullet. Consider using a consistent casing.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about a minor stylistic inconsistency in the changelog, not a code logic issue. The rules say not to comment on unimportant or purely informative issues. This is not a code change that requires action, and the changelog is not critical logic. The comment does not meet the threshold for being kept. Perhaps consistent documentation is important for some teams, and this could be considered a minor actionable suggestion. However, the rules are clear that only actionable code changes should be commented on, and this is not one. Even if documentation consistency is valued, the rules here are strict about not making comments unless a code change is required. This is not a code change. The comment should be deleted as it is not actionable and does not pertain to a code change.

Workflow ID: wflow_AaE2JKCyArEj4ndP

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed c8def5b in 30 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 33 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump updated to 1.497.0 looks consistent with the changelog.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_9f74pSE4HXpdJ7H4

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed be8bb8a in 37 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 33 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump updated to 1.497.0. Ensure consistency with release tagging and build configurations.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:17

• Draft comment:
  Typo: In the 'Bug Fixes' section, the bullet reads "ai chat tooltip + user settings autocomplete issue". For consistency with the 'AI chat' mention in the Features section, please consider capitalizing 'AI'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 50% This comment is purely informative and suggests a change for consistency in the PR description, which is not allowed by the rules. It does not provide a code suggestion or ask for a test to be written. Therefore, it should be removed.

Workflow ID: wflow_0lghlJ0v8QcdR4eY

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 69d0900 in 29 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 34 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump updated to 1.497.0. Ensure this version is in sync with changelog and other release artifacts.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_DMbmaYErVCIYx7lA

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 1e8d813 in 5 minutes and 53 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 35 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 6 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump to 1.497.0 looks good. Make sure the file ends with a newline to follow best practices.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:8

• Draft comment:
  In the backend bullet, consider capitalizing protocol names: 'http' → 'HTTP' and 'sse' → 'SSE', if referring to the standard protocols.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about capitalization in a changelog, which is a stylistic suggestion and not a required code change. The rules explicitly say not to make comments unless a code change is required. This is not a logic or actionable code quality issue. Therefore, the comment should be deleted. Perhaps consistent capitalization could be important for documentation quality, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over style in changelogs. Even if documentation consistency is valuable, the rules are clear that such comments are not to be made unless a code change is required. The comment should be deleted because it is a stylistic suggestion in a changelog and not an actionable code change.

3. CHANGELOG.md:9

• Draft comment:
  Consider capitalizing 'Svelte' in 'migrate to svelte 5 almost everywhere' to reflect the proper noun.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 20% <= threshold 50% The comment suggests a minor stylistic change in the text, which is not directly related to the code functionality or logic. It doesn't provide a substantial improvement to the code or its understanding.

4. CHANGELOG.md:11

• Draft comment:
  In the Azure bullet, consider capitalizing 'azure' to 'Azure' since it refers to the cloud provider.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about capitalization in a changelog, which is not a code logic or quality issue. The rules specify not to make unimportant or purely informative comments. This is a minor stylistic suggestion and does not require a code change. It does not impact functionality or code quality. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable, necessary comments over minor style suggestions. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that unimportant or purely informative comments should be omitted. This is not actionable in the sense required by the rules. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor, non-actionable stylistic suggestion and does not meet the bar for inclusion per the rules.

5. CHANGELOG.md:12

• Draft comment:
  For the Rust bullet, consider capitalizing 'rust' to 'Rust' and using 'SDK' in uppercase for consistency and clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is about capitalization in a changelog entry, which is not a code change and is purely stylistic. The rules say not to make comments unless a code change is required and to avoid unimportant or purely informative comments. This is not actionable in terms of code quality or logic. It is not about a functional or logic change, nor is it a significant documentation error. Perhaps consistent capitalization in changelogs is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize code and logic changes, not minor style in documentation. Even if consistency is nice, the rules are clear that such minor, non-code, non-functional comments should not be made. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor, non-actionable style suggestion in a changelog and does not pertain to a code change.

6. CHANGELOG.md:17

• Draft comment:
  Consider updating 'ai chat tooltip' to 'AI chat tooltip' for consistency with other entries that use 'AI'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is about a minor stylistic change in the changelog, not about code logic or a required change. The rules say not to make comments unless a code change is required, and not to make unimportant comments. This is purely informative and not actionable in a meaningful way. It does not affect the codebase's logic or functionality. Perhaps consistency in documentation is important for some teams, and this could be considered a minor actionable improvement. However, the rules prioritize only actionable, required changes, not minor stylistic suggestions. Even if consistency is valued, the rules are clear that only required changes should be commented on, and this is not required for functionality or correctness. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor, non-actionable stylistic suggestion and does not meet the threshold for required code changes per the rules.

Workflow ID: wflow_zZRMWJQS0B89sudV

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 1e8b6bb in 27 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 35 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bumped to 1.497.0. Confirm it aligns with the changelog and release docs.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_7y61gLg3zQcHZjtm

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 6793708 in 1 minute and 59 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 8 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump updated to 1.497.0. Ensure it matches the changelog and follows semver conventions.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:8

• Draft comment:
  Typo: Consider capitalizing “API” and “AI” in this entry for consistency (i.e. “add API tools to AI chat”).
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is purely about capitalization in a changelog entry, which is not a code change. The rules say not to make comments unless a code change is required and to avoid unimportant or purely informative comments. This is a minor style suggestion and does not impact functionality or code quality. It should be deleted according to the rules. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over style in documentation. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such comments are not useful for PR review and should be omitted. Delete the comment, as it is a minor stylistic suggestion in documentation and not an actionable code change.

3. CHANGELOG.md:9

• Draft comment:
  Typo: “http” and “sse” should likely be capitalized as “HTTP” and “SSE” for clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The rules specify not to make comments that are purely informative or unimportant. This is a minor stylistic suggestion in a changelog, not a code change or logic issue. There is no strong evidence that this change is required, and it does not impact functionality or code quality. Perhaps consistent capitalization could be important for documentation quality, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes and logic over style in documentation. Even if documentation consistency is valuable, the rules are clear that only actionable, necessary changes should be commented on, and this is not one. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor stylistic suggestion in documentation and not an actionable code change.

4. CHANGELOG.md:10

• Draft comment:
  Typo: Consider capitalizing “svelte” to “Svelte” for proper naming consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The rules specify not to make purely informative or unimportant comments, and this is a minor stylistic suggestion in a changelog, not a code change. There is no strong evidence that this is required for functionality or correctness. The changelog is not code logic, and capitalization of framework names is not critical. This is not actionable in the sense of code correctness or quality. Perhaps consistent naming in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize code changes and actionable feedback. This is not a code logic or quality issue. Even if naming consistency is nice, the rules are clear that such comments are not useful unless they pertain to code changes or logic. This is not actionable in the required sense. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor stylistic suggestion in documentation, not an actionable code change or logic issue.

5. CHANGELOG.md:13

• Draft comment:
  Typo: Consider capitalizing “azure” to “Azure” as it is a proper noun.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about a minor capitalization issue in a changelog, which is not a code change or logic issue. The rules specifically say not to make comments that are purely informative or unimportant. This is a minor style suggestion and does not require a code change. Therefore, the comment should be deleted. Perhaps consistent capitalization in changelogs is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over minor style issues. Even if professionalism is important, the rules are clear that such minor, non-code, non-actionable comments should not be kept. This comment should be deleted as it is not actionable, not about code, and is a minor, unimportant style suggestion.

6. CHANGELOG.md:14

• Draft comment:
  Typo: Consider capitalizing “rust” to “Rust” for consistency in proper naming.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This is a minor style suggestion in a changelog, not a code logic issue. The rules say not to comment on unimportant or purely informative issues. There is no strong evidence that this is a required change, and it does not affect functionality or code quality. The changelog is not code, and style consistency here is not critical. Perhaps consistent capitalization is important for some projects, but the rules prioritize actionable, important comments. This is not actionable in a meaningful way. Even if consistency is desired, this is not a code change and does not impact the product. The rules are clear that such comments should be avoided. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor, non-actionable style suggestion in a changelog and does not meet the threshold for an important, required change.

7. CHANGELOG.md:19

• Draft comment:
  Typo: Consider capitalizing “ai” to “AI” in the phrase “ai chat tooltip” for consistency.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about capitalization in a changelog, which is not a code logic issue. The rules explicitly say not to make comments that are purely informative or unimportant. This is a minor style nitpick and does not impact functionality or require a code change. Therefore, the comment should be deleted. Perhaps consistent capitalization in changelogs could be important for some teams' documentation standards. However, the rules prioritize actionable, important code changes, not minor style suggestions in documentation. Even if some teams care about changelog style, the rules here are clear: do not comment unless a code change is required. This is not actionable or important enough to warrant a comment. The comment should be deleted because it is a minor, non-actionable style suggestion in documentation, not a required code change.

8. CHANGELOG.md:23

• Draft comment:
  Typo: The abbreviation "btn" could be expanded to "button" for clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about a documentation change, not code logic. The rules say not to make comments that are purely informative or about unimportant issues. Expanding 'btn' to 'button' is a minor clarity improvement, but not a required code change. There is no strong evidence that this is necessary or important. The comment should likely be deleted as it does not meet the bar for actionable, required change. Perhaps clarity in documentation is important, and some teams may have style guides that prohibit abbreviations. However, unless there is a clear, enforced style guide, this is not a required change. Given the rules and lack of strong evidence that this is a required change, the comment should be deleted. If there were a style guide violation, that would be different, but there is no evidence of that here. Delete the comment. It is not about a required code change and is purely informative/minor.

Workflow ID: wflow_vZmPMfCyW2njb9tp

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 106fb1d in 33 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version updated to 1.497.0 as expected. Ensure consistency with the changelog.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 20% <= threshold 50% This comment is asking the PR author to ensure consistency with the changelog, which is similar to asking them to double-check something. It doesn't provide a specific suggestion or point out a specific issue with the code.

Workflow ID: wflow_1qc3Rngldr82pNao

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 2a41402 in 27 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump updated to 1.497.0. Ensure this is consistent with the CHANGELOG and release artifacts.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_ZxKU4obeT5wSGw3w

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 3ebba83 in 29 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump updated to 1.497.0 looks correct.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_SohR3wYyjSnzZugz

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 8b179b3 in 38 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump to 1.497.0 looks correct. Ensure that the trailing newline is consistent with project style.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_nRVuCZHiB3QtqCtD

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 7235cfe in 39 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version updated to 1.497.0. Confirm that this is synchronized with all version references.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_Iz7BRwySFm4yS7KV

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed b2a27d7 in 2 minutes and 18 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 5 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump update from 1.496.3 to 1.497.0 looks correct. Ensure all dependent references are updated accordingly.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:8

• Draft comment:
  In this entry, consider capitalizing the acronyms for clarity and consistency. For example, change "api tools to ai chat" to "API tools to AI chat".
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about capitalization in a changelog entry, which is a minor stylistic issue. The rules say not to make comments unless a code change is required, and not to make unimportant or purely informative comments. This is not a logic or code quality issue, nor does it affect functionality. Therefore, the comment should be deleted. Perhaps consistent capitalization could be important for some teams' documentation standards. However, the rules here are clear that such stylistic or informative comments should not be made unless they are actionable and required. Even if capitalization is important for some, the rules for this review process do not allow for such comments unless they are about actionable code changes. This is not the case here. The comment should be deleted because it is purely about style and does not require a code change. It does not meet the criteria for a useful review comment according to the rules.

3. CHANGELOG.md:9

• Draft comment:
  This bullet uses lowercase for HTTP-related acronyms. It might be clearer to use uppercase for consistency, e.g. change "streamable http" to "streamable HTTP" and "sse" to "SSE".
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is about capitalization in a changelog entry, which is a minor stylistic issue and does not require a code change. The rules specifically say not to make purely informative or unimportant comments. There is no functional impact from this change, and it does not affect code quality or logic. Therefore, the comment should be deleted. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic suggestions in documentation. Even if documentation consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such comments are not to be made unless a code change is required. This is not the case here. The comment should be deleted because it is a minor stylistic suggestion in documentation and does not require a code change, per the rules.

4. CHANGELOG.md:10

• Draft comment:
  Consider capitalizing "svelte" to "Svelte" as it is a proper noun referring to the framework (e.g., "migrate to Svelte 5").
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is about a stylistic change in the changelog, not a code change. The rules explicitly say not to make purely informative or unimportant comments. Capitalization in a changelog is not critical and does not require a code change. There is no strong evidence that this is an important or actionable issue. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over minor documentation style. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such minor, non-code, non-actionable comments should be removed. This comment should be deleted as it is a minor, purely informative suggestion about documentation style, not a required code change.

5. CHANGELOG.md:13

• Draft comment:
  Since "Azure" is a proper noun referring to the cloud service, consider capitalizing it (e.g. "Multiple Azure models support").
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is about a minor stylistic issue (capitalization) in a changelog, not about a code change or logic. The rules explicitly say not to make purely informative or unimportant comments. There is no code change required here, and the capitalization of 'Azure' in a changelog is not significant enough to warrant a review comment. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable, logic-related comments over style in changelogs. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such minor, non-code, non-logic comments should not be made. This comment should be deleted because it is purely informative and about a minor stylistic issue in a changelog, not a code change or logic.

Workflow ID: wflow_EjY3pcSwrY7IIalE

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 47d0346 in 22 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version update to 1.497.0 is correct for the release.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_4duQfU6K0l8sLGKL

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 146262e in 32 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump updated to 1.497.0. Ensure the file ends with a trailing newline.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 50% The comment is about a version bump, which is related to dependencies. The rules specify not to comment on dependency changes. Additionally, the comment about ensuring a trailing newline is purely informative and doesn't provide a specific suggestion or highlight a potential issue.

Workflow ID: wflow_Dbj0TLQ4UTYDS9Fj

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 27e10b1 in 32 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 1 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Version bump to 1.497.0 looks correct. Confirm that the trailing newline (L2 empty) is expected.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_YZ2EqrdvR1s4lgDT

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed c8b3e49 in 2 minutes and 42 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 39 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 8 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. version.txt:1

• Draft comment:
  Good version bump. Ensure version.txt is synced with release notes.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. CHANGELOG.md:8

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: Consider capitalizing acronyms for consistency. For example, 'api' could be 'API' and 'ai' in 'ai chat' should probably be 'AI'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about capitalization in a changelog entry, which is not a code change and does not affect logic or functionality. The rules explicitly state not to make purely informative or unimportant comments. This is a minor stylistic suggestion and does not require a code change. Therefore, the comment should be deleted. Perhaps consistent capitalization could be important for documentation quality, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over stylistic or documentation suggestions. Even if documentation consistency is valuable, the rules are clear that such comments should not be made unless a code change is required. This is not the case here. The comment should be deleted because it is a purely informative, stylistic suggestion and not an actionable code change.

3. CHANGELOG.md:9

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: 'http' and 'sse' are typically capitalized as 'HTTP' and 'SSE'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is purely about capitalization in a changelog, which is not a code change and does not affect functionality. The rules explicitly state not to make purely informative comments or those that are unimportant. This is a minor typographical suggestion and does not require a code change. Therefore, the comment should be deleted. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over style or typographical suggestions. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that such comments are not to be kept unless a code change is required. This is not the case here. The comment should be deleted as it is purely typographical and not actionable per the rules.

4. CHANGELOG.md:10

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: 'svelte' is usually capitalized as 'Svelte'.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The rules explicitly state not to make purely informative or unimportant comments. Typographical suggestions in a changelog do not impact code logic or functionality. This is not an actionable code change, and the changelog is not a place where such nitpicks are necessary. The comment does not meet the bar for requiring a code change. Perhaps consistent capitalization is important for branding or clarity, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over style. Even if capitalization is important, the rules are clear that such comments are not useful unless they require a code change. This is not the case here. This comment should be deleted as it is a purely typographical suggestion and not actionable per the rules.

5. CHANGELOG.md:12

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: Consider capitalizing 'go' to 'Go' (e.g. 'Go:') for clarity as it is a proper noun.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This comment is about a typographical suggestion, not a code change. The rules explicitly state not to make purely informative comments or those that are not actionable code changes. There is no strong evidence that this comment is required for a code change. It is not actionable in the context of code logic or quality. Perhaps consistent capitalization in changelogs could be important for some teams, but the rules here prioritize actionable code changes over style or typographical suggestions. Even if capitalization is important, the rules are clear that such comments should not be made unless a code change is required. This is not the case here. The comment should be deleted as it is a purely typographical suggestion and not an actionable code change.

6. CHANGELOG.md:13

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: 'azure' should likely be capitalized as 'Azure', since it is a proper noun.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The comment is about a typographical suggestion in the changelog, not about code logic or a required code change. The rules explicitly state not to make purely informative comments, and this is not actionable in terms of code quality. Therefore, the comment should be deleted. Perhaps consistent capitalization in documentation is important for professionalism, but the rules prioritize code changes and actionable feedback. Even if professionalism is important, the rules are clear that typographical suggestions in changelogs are not sufficient reason to keep a comment. The comment should be deleted because it is purely typographical and not actionable per the rules.

7. CHANGELOG.md:14

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: Consider capitalizing 'rust' to 'Rust' when referring to the Rust SDK.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This is a typographical suggestion for a changelog file, not a code change. The rules explicitly state not to make purely informative comments or those that do not require a code change. There is no strong evidence that this comment is necessary or actionable in terms of code quality or logic. Perhaps consistent capitalization in changelogs could be considered a quality issue, but the rules prioritize actionable code changes over style or typographical suggestions. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules are clear that typographical suggestions in documentation or changelogs are not actionable unless they affect code logic. The comment should be deleted as it is a purely typographical suggestion and does not require a code change.

8. CHANGELOG.md:23

• Draft comment:
  Typographical suggestion: The abbreviation 'btn' might be clearer as 'button' for consistency, if that aligns with the project's style guidelines.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% The rules specify not to make purely informative or stylistic comments, especially in changelogs. The suggestion does not require a code change and is not actionable in terms of logic or functionality. It is a minor style suggestion that does not impact the codebase or its operation. Perhaps consistent naming in changelogs could be important for some teams, but the rules here are clear that such comments are not useful unless they require a code change. Even if consistency is desirable, the rules prioritize actionable, logic-related feedback. This suggestion does not meet that bar. This comment should be deleted as it is purely stylistic and not actionable per the review rules.

Workflow ID: wflow_FIvqDdgZVJ1HJqW5

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[rubenfiszel]

🤖 Release is at https://github.com/windmill-labs/windmill/releases/tag/v1.497.0 🌻