Skip to content

Document multipart model handling for image edits#896

Open
akhilmmenon wants to merge 6 commits into
mainfrom
docs-update/5133
Open

Document multipart model handling for image edits#896
akhilmmenon wants to merge 6 commits into
mainfrom
docs-update/5133

Conversation

@akhilmmenon
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@akhilmmenon akhilmmenon commented Apr 29, 2026

Summary

  • Added provider-neutral guidance for /v1/images/edits multipart requests.
  • Clarified that callers should pass the upstream provider’s model or deployment name directly in the multipart model field.
  • Documented that Portkey does not rewrite provider-prefixed model aliases inside multipart payloads because they can contain large binary files.

Test plan

  • Verified the updated MDX files have no editor lint errors.
  • Confirmed the caveat is documented in both the image generation guide and the image edit API reference.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Adds Azure OpenAI image editing guidance to the Azure OpenAI integration docs, focusing on multipart (multipart/form-data) behavior and the requirement to pass the Azure deployment/model name directly in the multipart model field (without provider-prefixed aliases).

Changes:

  • Documented Azure OpenAI image editing usage and constraints for multipart requests.
  • Added an example showing the correct model value and a counterexample with a provider-prefixed alias.
  • Added a note explaining why Portkey does not rewrite model aliases inside multipart payloads.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment thread integrations/llms/azure-openai/azure-openai.mdx Outdated
@akhilmmenon akhilmmenon requested a review from narengogi April 29, 2026 10:03
@akhilmmenon akhilmmenon changed the title Update Azure-OpenAI docs to include Image Editing section Document multipart model handling for image edits Apr 29, 2026
@akhilmmenon akhilmmenon requested a review from Copilot April 29, 2026 10:23
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.


💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment thread product/ai-gateway/multimodal-capabilities/image-generation.mdx Outdated
Comment thread product/ai-gateway/multimodal-capabilities/image-generation.mdx Outdated
akhilmmenon and others added 2 commits April 29, 2026 16:17
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
akhilmmenon

This comment was marked as duplicate.

</Tabs>

<Note>
For Image Edit requests, provider-prefixed model aliases inside multipart payloads are not supported. The `model` value should match the model or deployment name expected by the upstream provider.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For image edit you can give add a section and example, then below just put note @provider/modelname in request body is not supported.

---

<Note>
Image edit requests use `multipart/form-data` and the provider-prefixed model aliases inside multipart payloads is not supported, so pass the upstream provider's model or deployment name directly in the `model` form field instead of values like `@provider/model-name`.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do not add here.

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.

3 participants