-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Add safety preprocessing and routing to ReactToMe #99
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
30e7dff
refactor: centralize preprocessing in BaseGraphBuilder
heliamoh 7c8f50f
feat: route unsafe queries in ReactToMe
heliamoh 734f361
feat: add safety routing to ReactToMe graph
heliamoh fdc5cd2
feat: strengthen safety checker policy
heliamoh c8f9f71
feat: add preprocessing workflow module
heliamoh 6378148
Apply formatting fixes after lint run
heliamoh cf347f9
style: simplify state merges in BaseGraphBuilder
heliamoh bbc6549
fix: address reviewer import and streaming feedback
heliamoh 855ad4d
fix: address reviewer feedback and resolve state management issues
heliamoh File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
heliamoh marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does adding
**statein spots like this solve some issue with updating the state?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The BaseState(**state, …) merge isn’t there to work around a bug—it’s there because LangGraph hands us an evolving state dict, and we don’t want to drop any of the fields that preprocessing or earlier nodes already wrote (rephrased input, safety tag, chat history, etc.). Postprocess only needs to add additional_content, so merging **state with the new field preserves the existing state while layering on the search results. If we just returned BaseState(additional_content=...), we’d lose everything else that was already in the state and downstream nodes would break.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LangGraph implicitly updates the state using the returned dict without dropping omitted fields, so we shouldn't need to do this.