Skip to content

feat(llm): add Kimi K2.5 to verified models#1907

Open
juanmichelini wants to merge 2 commits intoOpenHands:mainfrom
juanmichelini:add-kimi-k2.5-verified-model
Open

feat(llm): add Kimi K2.5 to verified models#1907
juanmichelini wants to merge 2 commits intoOpenHands:mainfrom
juanmichelini:add-kimi-k2.5-verified-model

Conversation

@juanmichelini
Copy link
Collaborator

Add kimi-k2.5 to VERIFIED_OPENHANDS_MODELS to make it available in the OpenHands provider interface.

Changes

  • Added kimi-k2.5 to VERIFIED_OPENHANDS_MODELS
  • Added comprehensive tests for kimi-k2.5:
    • Send reasoning content support
    • Default temperature configuration

The model already has proper feature configuration in model_features.py:

  • send_reasoning_content support
  • default temperature of 1.0

Related Issues

Note

This PR provides the SDK-level support for Kimi K2.5. The existing PR OpenHands/OpenHands#12730 adds support at the OpenHands V0 level, but V1 (current) uses the SDK for model configuration.

juanmichelini and others added 2 commits February 4, 2026 13:04
Add kimi-k2.5 to VERIFIED_OPENHANDS_MODELS to make it available
in the OpenHands provider interface.

The model already has proper feature configuration in model_features.py:
- send_reasoning_content support
- default temperature of 1.0

Added comprehensive tests for kimi-k2.5:
- Send reasoning content support
- Default temperature configuration

Related to OpenHands/OpenHands#12709
Addresses OpenHands/OpenHands#12730

Co-authored-by: openhands <[email protected]>
@juanmichelini juanmichelini marked this pull request as ready for review February 4, 2026 16:22
@juanmichelini juanmichelini requested a review from neubig February 4, 2026 16:22
Copy link
Collaborator

@all-hands-bot all-hands-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code looks solid! The model is correctly added to verified models and feature configuration is already in place. One minor suggestion for test consistency.

("Kimi-K2-Thinking", True), # Case insensitive
("moonshot/kimi-k2-thinking", True), # With provider prefix
("kimi-k2.5", True),
("Kimi-K2.5", True), # Case insensitive
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🟡 Suggestion: Consider adding provider prefix test cases for consistency with kimi-k2-thinking tests.

kimi-k2-thinking has tests like "moonshot/kimi-k2-thinking" (line 296), but kimi-k2.5 only has the base name and case-insensitive variant. Adding provider prefix tests would ensure the pattern matching works consistently across different deployment scenarios.

Suggested change
("Kimi-K2.5", True), # Case insensitive
("Kimi-K2.5", True), # Case insensitive
("moonshot/kimi-k2.5", True), # With provider prefix

("litellm_proxy/kimi-k2-thinking", 1.0), # With litellm proxy prefix
# kimi-k2.5 models should also default to 1.0
("kimi-k2.5", 1.0),
("Kimi-K2.5", 1.0), # Case insensitive
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🟡 Suggestion: Add provider prefix test cases here too for consistency.

kimi-k2-thinking tests include both moonshot/ and litellm_proxy/ prefixes (lines 324-325). Consider adding similar tests for kimi-k2.5:

Suggested change
("Kimi-K2.5", 1.0), # Case insensitive
("Kimi-K2.5", 1.0), # Case insensitive
("moonshot/kimi-k2.5", 1.0), # With provider prefix
("litellm_proxy/kimi-k2.5", 1.0), # With litellm proxy prefix

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants