Repository navigation
Conversation
This was referenced Sep 2, 2026
Collaborator
|
@codex review |
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: b8f8c4f270
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
busla
force-pushed
the
feat/cohere-reranker-api-url
branch
from
September 7, 2026 15:44
b8f8c4f to
69bff02
Compare
Adds cohereApiUrl (env COHERE_API_URL) alongside the existing jinaApiUrl, so a Cohere-compatible reranking endpoint (e.g. a LiteLLM proxy) can be used instead of api.cohere.com. Mirrors the Jina URL override pattern across the webSearch schema, auth loading, and SSRF preflight. Requires @librechat/agents to accept a cohereApiUrl in createReranker (companion PR: danny-avila/agents).
…tions - Expose cohereApiUrl input and help link in web search credential dialog - Include cohereApiUrl in WEB_SEARCH_URL_KEYS for outbound SSRF proxy exemption - Update client auth types, form handling, translations, and unit tests - Update AppService and agent unit tests
busla
force-pushed
the
feat/cohere-reranker-api-url
branch
from
September 30, 2026 13:16
7b8f260 to
95e1c18
Compare
This branch has not been deployed
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Summary
cohereApiUrl(envCOHERE_API_URL) to thewebSearchconfig, mirroring the existingjinaApiUrloverride, so a Cohere-compatible reranking endpoint (e.g. a self-hosted LiteLLM proxy) can be used instead ofapi.cohere.com.webSearchSchema,loadWebSearchConfig/webSearchAuth, and the SSRF preflight (USER_PROVIDED_URL_KEYS) that already coversjinaApiUrl/firecrawlApiUrl.librechat.example.yaml.This is a companion to danny-avila/agents#498 adding
cohereApiUrlsupport toCohereReranker/createReranker— without that change, the field is accepted here but has no effect since@librechat/agentsstill hardcodeshttps://api.cohere.com/v2/rerank. Docs for both are in LibreChat-AI/librechat.ai#753.Test plan
packages/apiandpackages/data-schemasunit tests pass (including new cases: default URL, custom URL, SSRF-blocked localhost URL forcohereApiUrl)tsc --noEmitclean inpackages/api,packages/data-schemas,packages/data-providereslintclean on all touched filesA note on why this is a re-submission
This is the third independent PR proposing this exact feature. A small, additive, test-covered config option going unreviewed for the better part of a year — proposed three times, by three different contributors, with real users confirming the need in production — is a real cost to a project that depends on outside contributions. I'm flagging the pattern here rather than quietly opening a fourth copy of the same request.
Related PRs:
Happy to coordinate with @npeham so we're not duplicating effort further.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code