* FEATURE: Tool name validation
- Add unique index to the name column of the ai_tools table
- correct our tests for AiToolController
- tool_name field which will be used to represent to LLM
- Add tool_name to Tools's presets
- Add duplicate tools validation for AiPersona
- Add unique constraint to the name column of the ai_tools table
* DEV: Validate duplicate tool_name between builin tools and custom tools
* lint
* chore: fix linting
* fix conlict mistakes
* chore: correct icon class
* chore: fix failed specs
* Add max_length to tool_name
* chore: correct the option name
* lintings
* fix lintings
Before this change, a summary was only outdated when new content appeared, for topics with "best replies", when the query returned different results. The intent behind this change is to detect when a summary is outdated as a result of an edit.
Additionally, we are changing the backfill candidates query to compare "ai_summary_backfill_topic_max_age_days" against "last_posted_at" instead of "created_at", to catch long-lived, active topics. This was discussed here: https://meta.discourse.org/t/ai-summarization-backfill-is-stuck-keeps-regenerating-the-same-topic/347088/14?u=roman_rizzi
### Why
This pull request fundamentally restructures how AI bots create and update web artifacts to address critical limitations in the previous approach:
1. **Improved Artifact Context for LLMs**: Previously, artifact creation and update tools included the *entire* artifact source code directly in the tool arguments. This overloaded the Language Model (LLM) with raw code, making it difficult for the LLM to maintain a clear understanding of the artifact's current state when applying changes. The LLM would struggle to differentiate between the base artifact and the requested modifications, leading to confusion and less effective updates.
2. **Reduced Token Usage and History Bloat**: Including the full artifact source code in every tool interaction was extremely token-inefficient. As conversations progressed, this redundant code in the history consumed a significant number of tokens unnecessarily. This not only increased costs but also diluted the context for the LLM with less relevant historical information.
3. **Enabling Updates for Large Artifacts**: The lack of a practical diff or targeted update mechanism made it nearly impossible to efficiently update larger web artifacts. Sending the entire source code for every minor change was both computationally expensive and prone to errors, effectively blocking the use of AI bots for meaningful modifications of complex artifacts.
**This pull request addresses these core issues by**:
* Introducing methods for the AI bot to explicitly *read* and understand the current state of an artifact.
* Implementing efficient update strategies that send *targeted* changes rather than the entire artifact source code.
* Providing options to control the level of artifact context included in LLM prompts, optimizing token usage.
### What
The main changes implemented in this PR to resolve the above issues are:
1. **`Read Artifact` Tool for Contextual Awareness**:
- A new `read_artifact` tool is introduced, enabling AI bots to fetch and process the current content of a web artifact from a given URL (local or external).
- This provides the LLM with a clear and up-to-date representation of the artifact's HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, improving its understanding of the base to be modified.
- By cloning local artifacts, it allows the bot to work with a fresh copy, further enhancing context and control.
2. **Refactored `Update Artifact` Tool with Efficient Strategies**:
- The `update_artifact` tool is redesigned to employ more efficient update strategies, minimizing token usage and improving update precision:
- **`diff` strategy**: Utilizes a search-and-replace diff algorithm to apply only the necessary, targeted changes to the artifact's code. This significantly reduces the amount of code sent to the LLM and focuses its attention on the specific modifications.
- **`full` strategy**: Provides the option to replace the entire content sections (HTML, CSS, JavaScript) when a complete rewrite is required.
- Tool options enhance the control over the update process:
- `editor_llm`: Allows selection of a specific LLM for artifact updates, potentially optimizing for code editing tasks.
- `update_algorithm`: Enables choosing between `diff` and `full` update strategies based on the nature of the required changes.
- `do_not_echo_artifact`: Defaults to true, and by *not* echoing the artifact in prompts, it further reduces token consumption in scenarios where the LLM might not need the full artifact context for every update step (though effectiveness might be slightly reduced in certain update scenarios).
3. **System and General Persona Tool Option Visibility and Customization**:
- Tool options, including those for system personas, are made visible and editable in the admin UI. This allows administrators to fine-tune the behavior of all personas and their tools, including setting specific LLMs or update algorithms. This was previously limited or hidden for system personas.
4. **Centralized and Improved Content Security Policy (CSP) Management**:
- The CSP for AI artifacts is consolidated and made more maintainable through the `ALLOWED_CDN_SOURCES` constant. This improves code organization and future updates to the allowed CDN list, while maintaining the existing security posture.
5. **Codebase Improvements**:
- Refactoring of diff utilities, introduction of strategy classes, enhanced error handling, new locales, and comprehensive testing all contribute to a more robust, efficient, and maintainable artifact management system.
By addressing the issues of LLM context confusion, token inefficiency, and the limitations of updating large artifacts, this pull request significantly improves the practicality and effectiveness of AI bots in managing web artifacts within Discourse.
* DEV: raise timeout for reasoning LLMs
* FIX: use id to identify llms, not model_name
model_name is not unique, in the case of reasoning models
you may configure the same llm multiple times using different
reasoning levels.
This update resolves a regression that was introduced in https://github.com/discourse/discourse-ai/pull/1036/files. Previously, only seeded models that were allowed could be configured for model settings. However, in our attempts to prevent unreachable LLM errors from not allowing settings to persist, it also unknowingly allowed seeded models that were not allowed to be configured. This update resolves this issue, while maintaining the ability to still set unreachable LLMs.
Before this change, we let you set the embeddings selected model back to " " even with embeddings enabled. This will leave the site in a broken state.
Additionally, it adds a fail-safe for these scenarios to avoid errors on the topics page.
We have removed this flag in core. All plugins now use the "top mode" for their navigation. A backwards-compatible change has been made in core while we remove the usage from plugins.
This change fixes two different problems.
First, we add a data migration to migrate the configuration of sites using Open AI's embedding model. There was a window between the embedding config changes and #1087, where sites could end up in a broken state due to an unconfigured selected model setting, as reported on https://meta.discourse.org/t/-/348964
The second fix drops pre-seeded search indexes of the models we didn't migrate and corrects the ones where the dimensions don't match. Since the index uses the model ID, new embedding configs could use one of these ones even when the dimensions no longer match.
This should give us a better idea on how our scanner is faring across sites.
```
# HELP discourse_discourse_ai_spam_detection AI spam scanning statistics
# TYPE discourse_discourse_ai_spam_detection counter
discourse_discourse_ai_spam_detection{db="default",type="scanned"} 16
discourse_discourse_ai_spam_detection{db="default",type="is_spam"} 7
discourse_discourse_ai_spam_detection{db="default",type="false_positive"} 1
discourse_discourse_ai_spam_detection{db="default",type="false_negative"} 2
```
We have a flag to signal we are shortening the embeddings of a model.
Only used in Open AI's text-embedding-3-*, but we plan to use it for other services.
* Use AR model for embeddings features
* endpoints
* Embeddings CRUD UI
* Add presets. Hide a couple more settings
* system specs
* Seed embedding definition from old settings
* Generate search bit index on the fly. cleanup orphaned data
* support for seeded models
* Fix run test for new embedding
* fix selected model not set correctly
This adds registration and last known IP information and email to scanning context.
This provides another hint for spam scanner about possible malicious users.
For example registered in India, replying from Australia or
email is clearly a throwaway email address.
To quickly select backfill candidates without comparing SHAs, we compare the last summarized post to the topic's highest_post_number. However, hiding or deleting a post and adding a small action will update this column, causing the job to stall and re-generate the same summary repeatedly until someone posts a regular reply. On top of this, this is not always true for topics with `best_replies`, as this last reply isn't necessarily included.
Since this is not evident at first glance and each summarization strategy picks its targets differently, I'm opting to simplify the backfill logic and how we track potential candidates.
The first step is dropping `content_range`, which serves no purpose and it's there because summary caching was supposed to work differently at the beginning. So instead, I'm replacing it with a column called `highest_target_number`, which tracks `highest_post_number` for topics and could track other things like channel's `message_count` in the future.
Now that we have this column when selecting every potential backfill candidate, we'll check if the summary is truly outdated by comparing the SHAs, and if it's not, we just update the column and move on
When enabling spam scanner it there may be old unscanned posts
this can create a risky situation where spam scanner operates
on legit posts during false positives
To keep this a lot safer we no longer try to hide old stuff by
the spammers.
