add config field in MLToolSpec for static parameters #2977

jngz-es · 2024-09-23T18:09:34Z

Description

Add config field in MLToolSpec to support static parameters in tool execution.

An example from the issue 2918.

POST /_plugins/_ml/agents/_register
{
	"name": "Test Agent",
	"type": "conversational",
	"description": "test agent",
	"llm": {
		"model_id": "<model id>",
		"parameters": {
      "max_iteration": 5,
      "stop_when_no_tool_found": true,
      "response_filter": "$.completion"
    }
	},
	"memory": {
		"type": "conversation_index"
	},
	"app_type": "chat",
	"tools": [
		{
			"type": "SearchIndexTool",
			"description": "A tool to search opensearch index with natural language question.",
			"include_output_in_agent_response": true,
			"config": {
				"input": "{\"index\": \"sample-index\", \"query\": {\"query\": { \"match_all\": {}}} }"
			}
		}
	]
}

Related Issues

#2836
#2918

Check List

New functionality includes testing.
New functionality has been documented.
API changes companion pull request created.
Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff.
Public documentation issue/PR created.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <[email protected]>

dbwiddis

Can you open an issue on Flow Framework repo amplifying what changed here? We will need to update the ToolStep to account for a change in API. Better yet, open a PR with the changes!

Also please make sure you update the API specification which Flow Framework will be using to validate these API parameters. (It's a checklist item at the top of this PR.)

CC: @owaiskazi19 @amitgalitz @junweid62 @ylwu-amzn

common/src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpec.java

jngz-es · 2024-09-23T20:04:06Z

The flow framework issue, opensearch-project/flow-framework#878.

Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <[email protected]>

dbwiddis · 2024-09-23T21:27:22Z

common/src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpec.java

@@ -24,20 +26,31 @@
 @EqualsAndHashCode
 @Getter
 public class MLToolSpec implements ToXContentObject {
+ public static final Version MINIMAL_SUPPORTED_VERSION_FOR_TOOL_CONFIG = CommonValue.VERSION_2_17_0;


Isn't 2.17.0 already released so this would be a 2.18.0 feature?

We want to catch up with 2.17 patch.

2.17.0 open source is already released. If you want to change the version on the back port to that branch that gets synced elsewhere that’s a reasonable option but for anyone consuming the maven central artifact BWC would break with that version check.

Actually looks like a 2.17.1 release is happening so it should be changed to that.

Except they don't want any new features, just critical bugfixes. So nevermind :|

This PR is not a security fix. We can leave it to 2.18.

Based on the discussion with Yuye, I will make the version 2.18. Thanks @yuye-aws

dbwiddis · 2024-09-23T21:29:05Z

common/src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpec.java

@@ -56,6 +70,9 @@ public MLToolSpec(StreamInput input) throws IOException {
 parameters = input.readMap(StreamInput::readString, StreamInput::readOptionalString);
 }
 includeOutputInAgentResponse = input.readBoolean();
+ if (input.getVersion().onOrAfter(MINIMAL_SUPPORTED_VERSION_FOR_TOOL_CONFIG) && input.readBoolean()) {
+ configMap = input.readMap(StreamInput::readOptionalString, StreamInput::readOptionalString);


This seems odd here, it looks like we're allowing null keys and null values in the map which I doubt is the case (at least the keys shouldn't be optional, and I'm not sure of the benefit of null values vs. just omitting the key). Same comment in the writeTo() below.

For the key, changed from readOptionalString/writeOptionalString to readString/writeString.

dbwiddis · 2024-09-23T21:34:02Z

common/src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpec.java

@@ -87,6 +112,9 @@ public XContentBuilder toXContent(XContentBuilder builder, Params params) throws
 builder.field(PARAMETERS_FIELD, parameters);
 }
 builder.field(INCLUDE_OUTPUT_IN_AGENT_RESPONSE, includeOutputInAgentResponse);
+ if (configMap != null && configMap.size() > 0) {


Suggested change

if (configMap != null && configMap.size() > 0) {

if (configMap != null && !configMap.isEmpty()) {

dbwiddis · 2024-09-23T21:36:23Z

common/src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpec.java

@@ -119,6 +148,9 @@ public static MLToolSpec parse(XContentParser parser) throws IOException {
 case INCLUDE_OUTPUT_IN_AGENT_RESPONSE:
 includeOutputInAgentResponse = parser.booleanValue();
 break;
+ case CONFIG_FIELD:
+ configMap = getParameterMap(parser.map());


may want to rename getParameterMap to be more general getStringToStringMap or similar.

It's an existing function, I prefer to keep it unchanged at this moment.

dbwiddis · 2024-09-23T21:38:23Z

common/src/test/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLAgentTest.java

@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ public void constructor_NullName() {
 MLAgentType.CONVERSATIONAL.name(),
 "test",
 new LLMSpec("test_model", Map.of("test_key", "test_value")),
- List.of(new MLToolSpec("test", "test", "test", Collections.EMPTY_MAP, false)),
+ List.of(new MLToolSpec("test", "test", "test", Collections.EMPTY_MAP, false, Collections.EMPTY_MAP)),


Suggested change

List.of(new MLToolSpec("test", "test", "test", Collections.EMPTY_MAP, false, Collections.EMPTY_MAP)),

List.of(new MLToolSpec("test", "test", "test", Collections.EMPTY_MAP, false, Collections.emptyMap())),

Use emptyMap() rather than EMPTY_MAP to get built in type validation. This will probably create unchecked cast warnings. (Same comment multiple times below.)

Makes sense, changed.

dbwiddis · 2024-09-23T21:39:44Z

common/src/test/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpecTest.java

+
+ Assert
+ .assertEquals(
+ "{\"type\":\"test\",\"name\":\"test\",\"description\":\"test\",\"parameters\":{\"test\":\"test\"},\"include_output_in_agent_response\":false,\"config\":{\"configKey\":\"configValue\"}}",


I don't think the order of fields in JSON is guaranteed unless you specify a sorting order. Same comment in other assertions.

Do you have any suggestions?

I usually do assertions that the string contains each key value pair. Or just extract to a map with a util function and check keys. I think there are some optional arguments with the Xcontent that let you specify an ordering.

Looked into this. Seems internal comments indicate the "XContent" preserves the same ordering, so since you're just parsing the same thing you built, this should be fine in this test case. The concern would be if you're using any sort of external parsing using a map, where the ordering isn't guaranteed.

dbwiddis · 2024-09-23T21:40:55Z

common/src/test/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpecTest.java

+ Assert.assertEquals(spec.getType(), "test");
+ Assert.assertEquals(spec.getName(), "test");
+ Assert.assertEquals(spec.getDescription(), "test");


Nit: using the same string everywhere can let copy-paste-and-forget-to-change errors slip through. Recommend using a different string for each field.

Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <[email protected]>

yuye-aws · 2024-09-24T09:08:39Z

@reuschling Can you help review this PR?

yuye-aws · 2024-09-24T09:14:34Z

@jngz-es Can you please provide an example on how to use tool config?

yuye-aws · 2024-09-24T09:18:35Z

ml-algorithms/src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/engine/algorithms/agent/MLChatAgentRunner.java

+ if (toolSpecMap.get(action).getConfigMap() != null) {
+ llmToolTmpParameters.putAll(toolSpecMap.get(action).getConfigMap());
+ }
 llmToolTmpParameters.put(MLAgentExecutor.QUESTION, actionInput);
 tools.get(action).run(llmToolTmpParameters, toolListener); // run tool
 } else {
 Map<String, String> parameters = new HashMap<>();
 parameters.putAll(tmpParameters);
 parameters.putAll(toolParams);
+ if (toolSpecMap.get(action).getConfigMap() != null) {
+ parameters.putAll(toolSpecMap.get(action).getConfigMap());
+ }


I would suggest extract parameters.putAll(toolSpecMap.get(action).getConfigMap()); outside of the if-else statement.

Don't get it. I need to add the config parameters override immediately before tool run.

yuye-aws · 2024-09-24T09:20:08Z

...src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/engine/algorithms/agent/MLConversationalFlowAgentRunner.java

+
+ // Override all parameters in tool config to tool execution parameters as the config contains the static parameters.
+ if (toolSpec.getConfigMap() != null && !toolSpec.getConfigMap().isEmpty()) {
+ executeParams.putAll(toolSpec.getConfigMap());
+ }
+


The function is the same as MLFlowAgentRunner. Please extract the function to classes like AgentUtils.

As far as I see, this PR writes all parameters from the new config map into the parameter map that is relevant for execution, which means that config parameters will overwrite existing ones with same name, i.e. have prioritization. Thus, specifying an own static input parameter as suggested in #2836 and #2918 is possible, but crucial is also the possibility to specify placeholders inside the new config. I can not see some substitutions here but maybe this takes place somewhere else, for all parameters?

For #2836, the placeholder "${parameters.MLModelTool.output}" was asked for.
For #2918, SearchIndexTool inside conversational agent, there is the need of a placeholder for the last action input of the agent, that must inserted into the OpenSearch query defined statically inside the new config. If conversational agent just sets the input parameter for the next tool, I doubt this information is lost if I specify a static input inside the tool config.

Last but not least, the documentation should be adjusted accordingly, e.g. SearchIndexTool and tutorial example. Also some list or hint to the common available placeholders would be nice, in order to know e.g. how the placeholder for the former conversational agent step action input looks like.

Good callout, I am thinking of supporting placeholders inside the config. Thanks @reuschling

yuye-aws · 2024-09-24T09:27:05Z

common/src/test/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpecTest.java

@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ public class MLToolSpecTest {

 @Test
 public void writeTo() throws IOException {
- MLToolSpec spec = new MLToolSpec("test", "test", "test", Map.of("test", "test"), false);
+ MLToolSpec spec = new MLToolSpec("test", "test", "test", Map.of("test", "test"), false, Map.of("configKey", "configValue"));


To avoid confusion from too many test String, I would recommend declaring MLToolSpec spec as a private static final member in this class. The test should be like new MLToolSpec("test_type", "test_name", "test_description", Map.of("test_parameter_key", "test_parameter_value", false, Map.of("configKey", "configValue")).

yuye-aws · 2024-09-24T09:34:32Z

...lgorithms/src/test/java/org/opensearch/ml/engine/algorithms/agent/MLFlowAgentRunnerTest.java

+ Map<String, String> params = Map
+ .of("toolType.param2", "value2", "toolName.param3", "value3", "param4", "value4", "toolName.tool_key", "dynamic value");
+
+ Map<String, String> result = mlFlowAgentRunner.getToolExecuteParams(toolSpec, params);
+
+ assertEquals("value1", result.get("param1"));
+ assertEquals("value3", result.get("param3"));
+ assertEquals("value4", result.get("param4"));
+ assertFalse(result.containsKey("toolType.param2"));
+ assertEquals("tool_config_value", result.get("tool_key"));


Please also verify that non-config parameters can override

jngz-es · 2024-09-24T21:39:14Z

@jngz-es Can you please provide an example on how to use tool config?

Provided an example in the description section.

add config field in MLToolSpec for static parameters

1bdc0ac

Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <[email protected]>

jngz-es requested review from b4sjoo, dhrubo-os, model-collapse, rbhavna, ylwu-amzn, zane-neo, Zhangxunmt, austintlee, HenryL27, samuel-oci and xinyual as code owners September 23, 2024 18:09

jngz-es temporarily deployed to ml-commons-cicd-env September 23, 2024 18:09 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

jngz-es temporarily deployed to ml-commons-cicd-env September 23, 2024 18:10 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

jngz-es temporarily deployed to ml-commons-cicd-env September 23, 2024 19:08 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

dbwiddis reviewed Sep 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

ylwu-amzn reviewed Sep 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

common/src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/common/agent/MLToolSpec.java Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

jngz-es mentioned this pull request Sep 23, 2024

[FEATURE] Ml-commons plugin introducing a new optional field "config" in MLTooSpec opensearch-project/flow-framework#878

Open

add version control

1eb2fd2

Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <[email protected]>

jngz-es temporarily deployed to ml-commons-cicd-env September 23, 2024 20:38 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

jngz-es had a problem deploying to ml-commons-cicd-env September 23, 2024 20:38 — with GitHub Actions Failure

jngz-es requested a review from ylwu-amzn September 23, 2024 20:39

jngz-es had a problem deploying to ml-commons-cicd-env September 23, 2024 21:38 — with GitHub Actions Failure

dbwiddis reviewed Sep 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

address comments I

9176b93

Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <[email protected]>

jngz-es temporarily deployed to ml-commons-cicd-env September 23, 2024 23:31 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

jngz-es had a problem deploying to ml-commons-cicd-env September 23, 2024 23:34 — with GitHub Actions Failure

yuye-aws reviewed Sep 24, 2024

View reviewed changes

jngz-es added the v2.18.0 Issues targeting release v2.18.0 label Sep 25, 2024

dbwiddis mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2024

Add optional config field to tool step opensearch-project/flow-framework#899

Draft

3 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

add config field in MLToolSpec for static parameters #2977

add config field in MLToolSpec for static parameters #2977

jngz-es commented Sep 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

dbwiddis left a comment •

edited

Loading

jngz-es commented Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

jngz-es Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 24, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 24, 2024

yuye-aws Sep 24, 2024

jngz-es Sep 25, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

jngz-es Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

jngz-es Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

jngz-es Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

jngz-es Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

jngz-es Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 24, 2024

dbwiddis Sep 23, 2024

yuye-aws commented Sep 24, 2024

yuye-aws commented Sep 24, 2024

yuye-aws Sep 24, 2024

jngz-es Sep 24, 2024

yuye-aws Sep 24, 2024

reuschling Sep 24, 2024

jngz-es Sep 25, 2024

yuye-aws Sep 24, 2024

yuye-aws Sep 24, 2024

jngz-es commented Sep 24, 2024

	if (configMap != null && configMap.size() > 0) {
	if (configMap != null && !configMap.isEmpty()) {

	List.of(new MLToolSpec("test", "test", "test", Collections.EMPTY_MAP, false, Collections.EMPTY_MAP)),
	List.of(new MLToolSpec("test", "test", "test", Collections.EMPTY_MAP, false, Collections.emptyMap())),

add config field in MLToolSpec for static parameters #2977

Are you sure you want to change the base?

add config field in MLToolSpec for static parameters #2977

Conversation

jngz-es commented Sep 23, 2024 • edited Loading

Description

Related Issues

Check List

dbwiddis left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jngz-es commented Sep 23, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

yuye-aws commented Sep 24, 2024

yuye-aws commented Sep 24, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jngz-es commented Sep 24, 2024

jngz-es commented Sep 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

dbwiddis left a comment •

edited

Loading