Awesome Reviewers

Avoid hardcoding model IDs, provider formats, or model-family checks directly in business logic; this creates duplicated knowledge that drifts out of sync and breaks when new models or providers are added. Prefer a centralized model registry or typed provider enum as the single source of truth for model IDs, response formats, and usage/pricing structures, and design shared types (e.g., usage tracking) to mirror the actual provider API shape rather than inventing a custom flattened structure.

When full abstraction isn’t yet feasible, make hardcoded checks resilient and self-documenting:

• Use pattern matching instead of exact-match lists for model families that will grow (e.g., match o[1-9]+(-mini)? instead of ["o1", "o3-mini"].includes(model)).
• Type provider/format parameters explicitly instead of accepting raw strings, and fail loudly (throw) for unsupported providers rather than silently defaulting.
• If you must temporarily hardcode provider-specific mappings (e.g., Claude model aliases), file a follow-up ticket to migrate the logic into the registry, and verify the change doesn’t silently alter behavior for existing consumers (e.g., confirm NO_MAPPING still resolves to the correct format for all current integrations).

Example of a more robust guard instead of an exact-match list:

// Fragile: breaks silently once o4, o5, ... are released
if (["o1", "o3-mini"].includes(model)) { ... }

// Better: generalizes across the model family
if (/^o[1-9]+(-mini)?$/.test(model)) { ... }

This site is open source. Improve this page.