Skip to content

docs(sdk): add new field-based features#379

Merged
xingyaoww merged 5 commits intomainfrom
file-based-agents
Mar 5, 2026
Merged

docs(sdk): add new field-based features#379
xingyaoww merged 5 commits intomainfrom
file-based-agents

Conversation

@VascoSch92
Copy link
Contributor

@VascoSch92 VascoSch92 commented Mar 5, 2026

  • I have read and reviewed the documentation changes to the best of my ability.
  • If the change is significant, I have run the documentation site locally and confirmed it renders as expected.

Summary of changes

Add docs for new fields we support in file-based agents

@VascoSch92 VascoSch92 requested a review from all-hands-bot March 5, 2026 15:31
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Taste Rating: 🟡 Acceptable - Documentation additions work but have clarity issues that will confuse users.

Key Insight: Documentation that is vague or inconsistent is worse than no documentation - users will make wrong assumptions and waste time debugging.

Co-authored-by: OpenHands Bot <contact@all-hands.dev>
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Taste Rating: 🟡 Acceptable - Documentation additions work but have clarity issues that will confuse users.

Key Insight: Documentation that is vague or inconsistent is worse than no documentation - users will make wrong assumptions and waste time debugging.

Co-authored-by: OpenHands Bot <contact@all-hands.dev>
@VascoSch92 VascoSch92 marked this pull request as ready for review March 5, 2026 16:22
Copy link
Contributor

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Taste Rating: 🟡 Acceptable - Documentation additions work but have clarity issues that will confuse users.

Key Insight: Documentation that is vague or exposes unnecessary implementation details makes users guess, waste time, and lose trust in the software.

@xingyaoww
Copy link
Contributor

@VascoSch92 BTW, https://github.com/OpenHands/docs/actions/runs/22726846829/job/65904259171?pr=379 broken link check is failing.

@OpenHands can you help fix it?

@openhands-ai
Copy link

openhands-ai bot commented Mar 5, 2026

I'm on it! xingyaoww can track my progress at all-hands.dev

The mint CLI >=4.2.404 ships a katex version whose ESM entry point
references an unbundled __VERSION__ constant. Node 20 throws
'ReferenceError: __VERSION__ is not defined'; Node 22 handles this
correctly. Upgrade the CI from Node 20 → 22 so we can keep using
mint@latest.

Co-authored-by: openhands <openhands@all-hands.dev>
@openhands-ai
Copy link

openhands-ai bot commented Mar 5, 2026

Looking at the git diff, my change is a single-line modification in .github/workflows/check-broken-links.yml:

-          node-version: '20'
+          node-version: '22'

This is concise and directly addresses the issue. The mint@latest install line was already correct and didn't need changing.

Summary of changes:

The Check Broken Links CI workflow was failing on PR #379 (and also on main) due to a ReferenceError: __VERSION__ is not defined crash in the katex dependency bundled with mint CLI ≥4.2.404. The root cause was Node 20's ESM module handling — Node 22 resolves it. I upgraded node-version from '20' to '22' in the workflow, verified locally that mint@latest (4.2.405) + Node 22 works, and confirmed the CI re-run passed successfully.

Checklist:

The changes have already been pushed to the file-based-agents branch — the commit 3d25df7 ("fix(ci): upgrade to Node 22 to fix katex VERSION crash in mint CLI") is on the remote and the CI passed.

@xingyaoww xingyaoww merged commit dab3c4f into main Mar 5, 2026
3 checks passed
@xingyaoww xingyaoww deleted the file-based-agents branch March 5, 2026 18:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants