docs(ai-chat): correct the extractNewToolResults return type#3959
Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📜 Recent review details🧰 Additional context used📓 Path-based instructions (1)docs/**/*.mdx📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (docs/CLAUDE.md)
Files:
🧠 Learnings (2)📚 Learning: 2026-03-10T12:44:14.176ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2026-04-30T20:30:29.458ZApplied to files:
🔇 Additional comments (1)
WalkthroughThe TypeScript type alias in the 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool's configuration or disable the tool if it's a critical failure. 🔧 ESLint
ESLint install timed out. The project may have too many dependencies for the sandbox. 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 |
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you. |
|
Summary
The "What extractNewToolResults returns" reference in the tool-result-auditing guide did not match the SDK. It listed an
inputfield thatchat.history.extractNewToolResults()never returns, and markedoutputas optional when it is always present.This corrects the block to the real
ChatNewToolResultshape (toolCallId,toolName,output, optionalerrorText). Every usage example in the same guide already reads only those fields, so the reference now matches both the examples and the code.