docs: scope issue #21 (TTS, STT, Files API, Context Compaction, Batch) - #34
Conversation
Exact wire schemas researched from docs.x.ai, plus a 5-PR implementation scope following the Safe-refresh pattern (one small, founder-gated PR per surface). Batch API included as a 5th PR (chat-only, per founder direction) even though it's not in issue #21's acceptance checklist. No server.py changes — planning docs only, same as #28.
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 1 minute Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis PR adds two documentation files: an implementation scope plan for Issue ChangesIssue
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Related issues: Issue Suggested labels: documentation Suggested reviewers: hrco Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/xai-delta-2026-07-issue21-schemas.md`:
- Around line 1-286: The Markdown in this document has multiple spacing/lint
issues around headings and fenced code blocks, causing MD022/MD031 failures.
Normalize the formatting by adding the required blank lines before and after
headings and fenced blocks throughout the document, especially around the
sections and JSON examples, while keeping the existing content in place.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: dae59e3b-dcac-43d4-bd51-250010e8de92
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
docs/issue-21-scope.mddocs/xai-delta-2026-07-issue21-schemas.md
Blank lines around headings and fenced code blocks per CodeRabbit PR #34.
Summary
docs/xai-delta-2026-07-issue21-schemas.md— exact wire schemas for all 5 new-surface APIs (TTS, STT, Files, Context Compaction, Batch), researched directly against docs.x.ai.docs/issue-21-scope.md— concrete implementation scope: 5 independently-mergeable PRs (one per surface, following the Safe-refresh pattern from fix: encode order_id to bytes before hmac.compare_digest #29-33), each with tool schemas,make_*_request()helper design, and test file plan.Batch API is included as PR 5 (chat-only) per founder direction, even though it's a stretch goal not in issue #21's acceptance checklist — image/video batch request shapes are unconfirmed in the docs, so those are explicitly out of scope for v1.
Two flagged open risks carried into implementation rather than guessed at:
keytermdelimiter format (unconfirmed)expires_afterbeforefile) —httpx'sdata=/files=merge doesn't guarantee thisNo
server.pychanges — planning/research docs only, mirrors how #28 shipped ahead of the code PRs for the prior Safe-refresh batch.Test plan
grok-tts) implementation starts🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit