Function caller helpers - create definition from attributes, invoke the function as specified by LLM

[vbandi]

Hi,

Thank you for the great library. To give back, I'd like to contribute.

I have the following working in my project with the latest version:
FunctionCallingHelper.GetFunctionDefinition(MethodInfo methodInfo) - This builds a FunctionDefinition using reflection and custom attributes:

• GptFunctionDescriptionAttribute
• GptParameterDescriptionAttribute

FunctionCallingHelper.GetFunctionDefinitions(object obj) - using the above, it returns a list of FunctionDefinitions for a given object
T? FunctionCallingHelper.CallFunction<T>(FunctionCall functionCall, object obj) - invokes the function specified by the LLM.

I'd like to contribute this to the project, but I'd need some pointers before creating a PR.

• What is the best place to put these into? The main project or the Utilities?
• I saw the playground projects, but I'd prefer using a Unit test for this to make sure the edge cases work (NUnit, MS Test, etc). Do you have a preference?

[kayhantolga]

Hi @vbandi, Thanks a lot.

Utilities are the best place because I want to keep the main project with similar capabilities to the API (like a simple wrapper). Anything additional should go to Utilities.

Unit tests are great, and I am hoping to add unit tests in the future. I am more familiar with xUnit, so please use xUnit if possible. If not, other options are also acceptable.

I have a question that is puzzling me: why use gpt in the naming convention (GptFunctionDescriptionAttribute)? Previously, I used Gpt3 in the library name and regretted it. Furthermore, I don't think your methods will be dependent on any specific model (like GPT); rather, they will be descriptions/reflections of functions. Therefore, a name without GPT would be better.

What do you think?

[vbandi]

Awesome, Utilities it is.

I have no experience with xUnit, but the basics are the same for all, so that shouldn't be a problem either. Do you want me to create a separate unit test project? (I'd do that for my own stuff, but this is yours :) ). Also, I prefer Should or Shouldly for unit tests.

As for naming: I wanted to keep it separate from the System.ComponentModel namespace's own approach (which is not suitable for this), but I agree, GPT may not be needed. Would you be OK with FunctionDescriptionAttribute and ParameterDescriptionAttribute?

[kayhantolga]

Creating a separate unit test project is fine; please put it under the Test folder. I may move it in the future.
I believe that FunctionDescriptionAttribute and ParameterDescriptionAttribute are suitable.
Please use Should. I do not have any experience with Shouldly (unless you suggest that it is better and I should learn it 😅).

[vbandi]

I've ended up using Shouldly as it's much newer (2023 vs 2013). Take a look at the PR (coming right up), and if you don't like it, I can switch to Should, they are pretty similar.