- Update the load_tools method to properly accept `callbacks` arguments.
- Add a deprecation warning when `callback_manager` is passed
- Add two unit tests to check the deprecation warning is raised and to
confirm the callback is passed through.
Closes issue #4096
Move tool validation to each implementation of the Agent.
Another alternative would be to adjust the `_validate_tools()` signature
to accept the output parser (and format instructions) and add logic
there. Something like
`parser.outputs_structured_actions(format_instructions)`
But don't think that's needed right now.
I think the logic of
https://github.com/hwchase17/langchain/pull/3684#pullrequestreview-1405358565
is too confusing.
I prefer this alternative because:
- All `Tool()` implementations by default will be treated the same as
before. No breaking changes.
- Less reliance on pydantic magic
- The decorator (which only is typed as returning a callable) can infer
schema and generate a structured tool
- Either way, the recommended way to create a custom tool is through
inheriting from the base tool
Tradeoffs here:
- No lint-time checking for compatibility
- Differs from JS package
- The signature inference, etc. in the base tool isn't simple
- The `args_schema` is optional
Pros:
- Forwards compatibility retained
- Doesn't break backwards compatibility
- User doesn't have to think about which class to subclass (single base
tool or dynamic `Tool` interface regardless of input)
- No need to change the load_tools, etc. interfaces
Co-authored-by: Hasan Patel <mangafield@gmail.com>
- Proactively raise error if a tool subclasses BaseTool, defines its
own schema, but fails to add the type-hints
- fix the auto-inferred schema of the decorator to strip the
unneeded virtual kwargs from the schema dict
Helps avoid silent instances of #3297
- Remove dynamic model creation in the `args()` property. _Only infer
for the decorator (and add an argument to NOT infer if someone wishes to
only pass as a string)_
- Update the validation example to make it less likely to be
misinterpreted as a "safe" way to run a repl
There is one example of "Multi-argument tools" in the custom_tools.ipynb
from yesterday, but we could add more. The output parsing for the base
MRKL agent hasn't been adapted to handle structured args at this point
in time
---------
Co-authored-by: Harrison Chase <hw.chase.17@gmail.com>
Follow-up of @hinthornw's PR:
- Migrate the Tool abstraction to a separate file (`BaseTool`).
- `Tool` implementation of `BaseTool` takes in function and coroutine to
more easily maintain backwards compatibility
- Add a Toolkit abstraction that can own the generation of tools around
a shared concept or state
---------
Co-authored-by: William FH <13333726+hinthornw@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Harrison Chase <hw.chase.17@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Francisco Ingham <fpingham@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Dhruv Anand <105786647+dhruv-anand-aintech@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: cragwolfe <cragcw@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Anton Troynikov <atroyn@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Oliver Klingefjord <oliver@klingefjord.com>
Co-authored-by: William Fu-Hinthorn <whinthorn@Williams-MBP-3.attlocal.net>
Co-authored-by: Bruno Bornsztein <bruno.bornsztein@gmail.com>
