feat: update thinking mode support to exclude gemini-2.0 models and simplify logic.

[kevin-ramdass]

Summary

Simplify the logic for determining whether a model supports thinking config or not.

Details

Related Issues

How to Validate

Pre-Merge Checklist

• Updated relevant documentation and README (if needed)
• Added/updated tests (if needed)
• Noted breaking changes (if any)
• Validated on required platforms/methods:
  • MacOS
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker
    • Podman
    • Seatbelt
  • Windows
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker
  • Linux
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @kevin-ramdass, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refactors the mechanism for determining which models support 'thinking mode'. The primary goal is to simplify the underlying logic, making it more concise and easier to maintain. The change specifically excludes all gemini-2.0 models from utilizing this feature, while implicitly allowing all other models not prefixed with gemini-2.0 to support it. This ensures clearer model compatibility rules and a more streamlined codebase.

Highlights

• Simplified Logic for Thinking Mode Support: The core logic within the isThinkingSupported function has been significantly simplified, moving from a multi-condition check to a single, more direct exclusion rule.
• Exclusion of Gemini-2.0 Models: All models starting with gemini-2.0 are now explicitly excluded from supporting the 'thinking mode' feature, streamlining compatibility checks.
• Updated Test Coverage: Unit tests have been updated to reflect the new logic, including explicit checks for gemini-2.5-flash support and gemini-2.0 model exclusion.
• Dependency Cleanup: The unused import for DEFAULT_GEMINI_MODEL_AUTO has been removed from client.ts, contributing to cleaner code.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request simplifies the logic for isThinkingSupported by changing it from an allow-list to a deny-list, effectively enabling the 'thinking' feature for all models except the gemini-2.0 family. While this simplifies the code, I've raised a concern about the safety of this approach. Using a deny-list is less robust and could lead to runtime errors if a model that doesn't support thinkingConfig is used. I've suggested reverting to an updated allow-list for better safety and correctness.

[github-actions]

Size Change: -72 B (0%)

Total Size: 21.1 MB

ℹ️ View Unchanged

Filename	Size	Change
./bundle/gemini.js	21.1 MB	-72 B (0%)
./bundle/sandbox-macos-permissive-closed.sb	1.03 kB	0 B
./bundle/sandbox-macos-permissive-open.sb	890 B	0 B
./bundle/sandbox-macos-permissive-proxied.sb	1.31 kB	0 B
./bundle/sandbox-macos-restrictive-closed.sb	3.29 kB	0 B
./bundle/sandbox-macos-restrictive-open.sb	3.36 kB	0 B
./bundle/sandbox-macos-restrictive-proxied.sb	3.56 kB	0 B

_{compressed-size-action}