Skip to content

fix: ensureTitle falls back to main model when getSmallModel fails - #25340

Closed
per-hap-s wants to merge 1 commit into
anomalyco:devfrom
per-hap-s:fix/ensure-title-model-fallback
Closed

fix: ensureTitle falls back to main model when getSmallModel fails#25340
per-hap-s wants to merge 1 commit into
anomalyco:devfrom
per-hap-s:fix/ensure-title-model-fallback

Conversation

@per-hap-s

@per-hap-s per-hap-s commented May 1, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Issue for this PR

Closes #25344

Type of change

  • Bug fix

What does this PR do?

When provider.getSmallModel() fails (no small model configured) or returns Option.None, the ?? operator in ensureTitle doesn't handle either case properly:

  1. If getSmallModel throws an Effect error, yield* propagates it past ??, and the error is silently swallowed by the t.ignore pipe in the forkIn scope
  2. If getSmallModel returns Option.None (which is an object, not nullish), ?? doesn't trigger the fallback to getModel

In both scenarios, mdl ends up as an invalid model, the LLM stream fails, and the session title is never generated — leaving it permanently as "New session - ...".

The fix replaces ?? with Effect.orElse() for proper Effect-TS error recovery, ensuring the main model is always used as a fallback.

How did you verify your code works?

Confirmed by testing locally: without the fix, all new sessions remain stuck with the default title regardless of message count. The fix ensures the model fallback chain works correctly when no small model is configured.

Checklist

  • I have tested my changes locally
  • I have not included unrelated changes in this PR

@github-actions github-actions Bot added needs:issue needs:compliance This means the issue will auto-close after 2 hours. labels May 1, 2026
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for your contribution!

This PR doesn't have a linked issue. All PRs must reference an existing issue.

Please:

  1. Open an issue describing the bug/feature (if one doesn't exist)
  2. Add Fixes #<number> or Closes #<number> to this PR description

See CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

@github-actions github-actions Bot removed needs:issue needs:compliance This means the issue will auto-close after 2 hours. labels May 1, 2026
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented May 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for updating your PR! It now meets our contributing guidelines. 👍

@bkutasi bkutasi mentioned this pull request May 1, 2026
Open
@speto speto mentioned this pull request May 7, 2026
Closed
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Automated PR Cleanup

Thank you for contributing to opencode.

Due to the high volume of PRs from users and AI agents, we periodically close older PRs using automated criteria so maintainers can focus review time on the most active and community-supported contributions.

This PR was closed because it matched the following cleanup criteria:

  • The PR was created more than 1 month ago
  • The PR had fewer than 2 positive reactions
  • Positive reactions are counted as thumbs-up, heart, celebration, or rocket reactions on the PR

PRs created within the last month are not affected by this cleanup.

If you believe this PR was closed incorrectly, or if you are still actively working on it, please leave a comment explaining why it should be reopened. A maintainer can review and reopen it if appropriate.

Thanks again for taking the time to contribute.

@github-actions github-actions Bot closed this Jun 1, 2026
@easydev991

easydev991 commented Jun 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Why did you close this PR?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

automated-pr-cleanup

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Auto-title generation silently fails when provider has no small model

2 participants

@per-hap-s @easydev991