anomalyco/opencode
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode.git synced 2026-07-22 10:15:31 -04:00
Code Issues 5.9k Packages Projects Releases 19 Wiki Activity

bug? Denying a tool call will continue generation #17

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-16 17:24:52 -05:00 by yindo · 9 comments
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:52 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Originally created by @rekram1-node on GitHub (May 17, 2025).

Not sure if this is expected behavior but when I deny a tool call I normally like to tell the llm the reasoning as to why, but I have noticed that if I deny a tool call it will just continue the loop and the LLM will start generating again right away, (not giving me a chance to instruct it better).

I wasn't sure if this was intentional behavior or if it was a bug. I was kinda used to the previous paradigm so I figured I would open issue to see if it was intentional, if it is then I can close it.

Originally created by @rekram1-node on GitHub (May 17, 2025). Not sure if this is expected behavior but when I deny a tool call I normally like to tell the llm the reasoning as to why, but I have noticed that if I deny a tool call it will just continue the loop and the LLM will start generating again right away, (not giving me a chance to instruct it better). I wasn't sure if this was intentional behavior or if it was a bug. I was kinda used to the previous paradigm so I figured I would open issue to see if it was intentional, if it is then I can close it.
yindo closed this issue 2026-02-16 17:24:52 -05:00
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:52 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@adamdotdevin commented on GitHub (May 17, 2025):

this sounds like a bug. i hadn't ran into this but my expectation is the same as yours, it should stop. i also want to add real-time steering and there's a current bug where after interrupting we don't always send a valid message structure back to the model on subsequent calls. those are separate but related issues.

@adamdotdevin commented on GitHub (May 17, 2025): this sounds like a bug. i hadn't ran into this but my expectation is the same as yours, it should stop. i also want to add real-time steering and there's a current bug where after interrupting we don't always send a valid message structure back to the model on subsequent calls. those are separate but related issues.
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:52 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@ezynda3 commented on GitHub (May 18, 2025):

I have run into this as well. I totally forgot about it and already conditioned myself to press ESC as soon as I deny a tool call lol.

@ezynda3 commented on GitHub (May 18, 2025): I have run into this as well. I totally forgot about it and already conditioned myself to press `ESC` as soon as I deny a tool call lol.
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:52 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@rekram1-node commented on GitHub (May 18, 2025):

I think Ik the issue, I will prolly make a pr for the fix today or tmr

@rekram1-node commented on GitHub (May 18, 2025): I think Ik the issue, I will prolly make a pr for the fix today or tmr
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:53 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@rekram1-node commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025):

Since Dax is doing his big refactor I will leave this be until he is done, if the issue persists I will open a pr

@rekram1-node commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025): Since Dax is doing his big refactor I will leave this be until he is done, if the issue persists I will open a pr
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:53 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@adamdotdevin commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025):

Since Dax is doing his big refactor I will leave this be until he is done, if the issue persists I will open a pr

yeah, good shout for everyone that's been active here @PhantomReactor @ezynda3 @Adictya @l0gicgate, probably best to hold off on any changes that don't live in the internal/tui dir, dax is rewriting the backend in JS (mullet stack!)

@adamdotdevin commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025): > Since Dax is doing his big refactor I will leave this be until he is done, if the issue persists I will open a pr yeah, good shout for everyone that's been active here @PhantomReactor @ezynda3 @Adictya @l0gicgate, probably best to hold off on any changes that don't live in the internal/tui dir, dax is rewriting the backend in JS (mullet stack!)
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:53 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@adamdotdevin commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025):

this will reduce scope a ton (we can leverage the AI SDK to support all providers without owning any of the code) among other things

@adamdotdevin commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025): this will reduce scope a ton (we can leverage the AI SDK to support all providers without owning any of the code) among other things
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:53 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@ezynda3 commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025):

Interesting. Do we plan to basically spawn the TS server in the background? Also I generally stay on the bleeding edge by using go install direct from the github repo but I suppose that won't work now with there being two separate binaries. Could be cool if the CLI downloads the server on first start maybe.

@ezynda3 commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025): Interesting. Do we plan to basically spawn the TS server in the background? Also I generally stay on the bleeding edge by using `go install` direct from the github repo but I suppose that won't work now with there being two separate binaries. Could be cool if the CLI downloads the server on first start maybe.
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:53 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@adamdotdevin commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025):

i know distribution is the tricky part of this, i'll let @thdxr chime in on that when he's ready

@adamdotdevin commented on GitHub (May 19, 2025): i know distribution is the tricky part of this, i'll let @thdxr chime in on that when he's ready
yindo commented 2026-02-16 17:24:53 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

@rekram1-node commented on GitHub (Jun 14, 2025):

closing, this is no longer relevant in latest opencode release.

@rekram1-node commented on GitHub (Jun 14, 2025): closing, this is no longer relevant in latest opencode release.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
acp
bad
bug
discussion
docs
documentation
enhancement
extension
good first issue
growth
help-wanted
mcp
model-problem
needs:compliance
nix
opentui
perf
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 tui
web
windows
zen
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
yindo
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: anomalyco/opencode#17
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?