Skip to content

Add gemini-3.8-flash to Gemini CUA, HyperAgent, and Browser Use LLM types - #113

Merged
NikhilShahi merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
devin/1788398017-gemini-3-8-flash
Sep 3, 2026
Merged

Add gemini-3.8-flash to Gemini CUA, HyperAgent, and Browser Use LLM types#113
NikhilShahi merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
devin/1788398017-gemini-3-8-flash

Conversation

@shrisukhani

@shrisukhani shrisukhani commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Adds "gemini-3.8-flash" to GeminiComputerUseLlm, HyperAgentLlm, and BrowserUseLlm. Server support: hyperbrowserai/browserctrl#1385 (it is now the server-side default for Gemini Computer Use).

Changes

  • src/types/constants.ts: new "gemini-3.8-flash" literal in the three LLM union types.

Validation

  • corepack yarn build

Link to Devin session: https://app.devin.ai/sessions/7dccc05e05b04c63bd5760859b161275
Open in Devin Desktop: https://app.devin.ai/desktop/session/7dccc05e05b04c63bd5760859b161275?variant=devin
Requested by: @shrisukhani


Note

Low Risk
Additive type and JSON-schema enum updates only; no auth, data, or execution logic changes.

Overview
Adds gemini-3.8-flash as a selectable model across client types and tool schemas so agents can target the newer Gemini flash model (aligned with server default in browserctrl#1385).

In src/types/constants.ts, the literal is added to BrowserUseLlm, HyperAgentLlm, and GeminiComputerUseLlm. In src/tools/schema.ts, the same value is included in BROWSER_USE_LLM_SCHEMA for llm, plannerLlm, and pageExtractionLlm on browser-use tools. Existing defaults remain gemini-2.0-flash for browser use.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit f223684. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

@devin-ai-integration

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🤖 Devin AI Engineer

I'll be helping with this pull request! Here's what you should know:

✅ I will automatically:

  • Address comments on this PR. Add '(aside)' to your comment to have me ignore it.
  • Look at CI failures and help fix them

Note: I can only respond to comments from users who have write access to this repository.

⚙️ Control Options:

  • Disable automatic comment, CI, and merge conflict monitoring

@greptile-apps

greptile-apps Bot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Greptile Summary

Adds gemini-3.8-flash to the public LLM type unions and completes the prior fix by allowing that value in the strict Browser Use tool schema.

  • Extends BrowserUseLlm, HyperAgentLlm, and GeminiComputerUseLlm.
  • Adds the new identifier to BROWSER_USE_LLM_SCHEMA for llm, plannerLlm, and pageExtractionLlm.

Confidence Score: 5/5

The PR appears safe to merge.

No blocking failure remains.

Important Files Changed

Filename Overview
src/types/constants.ts Adds the new model identifier to all three intended TypeScript unions without changing runtime behavior.
src/tools/schema.ts Adds the model identifier to the shared Browser Use schema enum, resolving the previously reported strict-validation mismatch.

Reviews (2): Last reviewed commit: "Add gemini-3.8-flash to browser-use tool..." | Re-trigger Greptile

Comment thread src/types/constants.ts
| "gemini-2.0-flash"
| "gemini-2.5-flash";
| "gemini-2.5-flash"
| "gemini-3.8-flash";

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Browser-use schema rejects new model

When an OpenAI or Anthropic strict tool definition selects gemini-3.8-flash for llm, plannerLlm, or pageExtractionLlm, BrowserUseLlm accepts the value but BROWSER_USE_LLM_SCHEMA omits it, causing strict validation to reject or exclude the newly supported model.

Prompt To Fix With AI
This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: src/types/constants.ts
Line: 52

Comment:
**Browser-use schema rejects new model**

When an OpenAI or Anthropic strict tool definition selects `gemini-3.8-flash` for `llm`, `plannerLlm`, or `pageExtractionLlm`, `BrowserUseLlm` accepts the value but `BROWSER_USE_LLM_SCHEMA` omits it, causing strict validation to reject or exclude the newly supported model.

---

For each issue above, determine whether it is valid and should be fixed. If so, fix it directly.

Fix in Codex

@shrisukhani
shrisukhani added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 3, 2026
@github-merge-queue
github-merge-queue Bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to no response for status checks Sep 3, 2026
@NikhilShahi
NikhilShahi merged commit 416b099 into main Sep 3, 2026
4 checks passed
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