LCORE-304: REST API #264
LCORE-304: REST API #264
Conversation
WalkthroughA new UML sequence diagram illustrating REST API interactions was added to the documentation. The README.md was updated with a "REST API" section, including a visual reference to the new diagram. No code or API changes were made; all updates are limited to documentation. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Client
participant API_Server
Client->>API_Server: GET /info
API_Server-->>Client: InfoResponse
Client->>API_Server: GET /models
API_Server-->>Client: ModelsResponse
Client->>API_Server: POST /query (QueryRequest)
API_Server-->>Client: QueryResponse
Client->>API_Server: POST /streaming_query (QueryRequest)
API_Server-->>Client: StreamingQueryResponse
Client->>API_Server: POST /feedback (FeedbackRequest)
API_Server-->>Client: FeedbackResponse
Client->>API_Server: GET /conversation/{id}
API_Server-->>Client: ConversationResponse
Client->>API_Server: DELETE /conversation/{id}
API_Server-->>Client: ConversationDeleteResponse
Client->>API_Server: GET /ready
API_Server-->>Client: ReadinessResponse
Client->>API_Server: GET /live
API_Server-->>Client: LivenessResponse
Estimated code review effort1 (<30 minutes) Possibly related PRs
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (2)
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🔭 Outside diff range comments (2)
docs/rest_api.uml (1)
1-31: PNG referenced in README is missing.README embeds
docs/rest_api.png, but the file isn’t part of this PR. Either:
- Commit the rendered PNG, or
- Document how to regenerate it (e.g.
plantuml -tpng docs/rest_api.uml) and link to the UML source instead.Without this the GitHub Pages site will show a broken image.
README.md (1)
472-475: Broken image reference (docs/rest_api.png).The image is not included in the repository, resulting in a 404 on the rendered page. Add the PNG or switch to embedding the
.umlvia a PlantUML server.
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
docs/rest_api.uml (1)
18-22: Consider plural resource naming (/conversations/{id}).Elsewhere the service tends to use plural nouns. Using
/conversation/{id}here may confuse consumers.README.md (1)
472-473: Add alt-text / explanatory paragraph for accessibility.A one-sentence description of what the REST API diagram depicts would improve usability for screen-reader users and anyone browsing without images.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
docs/rest_api.pngis excluded by!**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
README.md(1 hunks)docs/rest_api.uml(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
docs/rest_api.uml (1)
24-28:/ready&/liveconflict with/v1/readiness&/v1/liveness.Health-check endpoints carry a different naming scheme in the README (§ Liveness/Readiness). Please choose one convention and stick to it across both text and diagrams.
tisnik
force-pushed
the
lcore-304-rest-api
branch
from
7aebfe7 to
2ac39f7
Compare
1 participant
Description
LCORE-304: REST API
Type of change
Related Tickets & Documents
Summary by CodeRabbit