feat(api)!: deprecate toolgroup and tool_runtime apis

[jaideepr97]

What does this PR do?

marks toolgroup and tool_runtime APIs for deprecation

Closes #4233 and #4061 (partially)

How long do we wait before we remove deprecated APIs?

Test Plan

[ashwinb]

How long do we wait before we remove deprecated APIs?

We wait for one "minor" release right now -- so we will mark these for deprecation for 0.4.x and then remove them for 0.5.x

[ashwinb]

I wonder why the Stainless SDK build checks did not run on this PR. Something about CI might be wonky given the llama-stack-api move? Maybe the wildcards for actions need to be updated @cdoern ?

[github-actions]

✱ Stainless preview builds

This PR will update the llama-stack-client SDKs with the following commit message.

feat(api): deprecate `toolgroup` and `tool_runtime` apis

⚠️ llama-stack-client-node studio · code

There was a regression in your SDK.
generate ⚠️ → build ✅ → lint ✅ → test ✅

npm install https://pkg.stainless.com/s/llama-stack-client-node/3f75ac506692b7706c978f11b5d4d6e012fd7357/dist.tar.gz

⚠️ llama-stack-client-kotlin studio · code

There was a regression in your SDK.
generate ⚠️ → lint ✅ → test ❗

⚠️ llama-stack-client-python studio · conflict

There was a regression in your SDK.

⚠️ llama-stack-client-go studio · code

There was a regression in your SDK.
generate ⚠️ → lint ❗ → test ❗

go get github.com/stainless-sdks/llama-stack-client-go@6f84fca76fdabc8d10470042822bc491639461ae

---

This comment is auto-generated by GitHub Actions and is automatically kept up to date as you push.
Last updated: 2025-12-01 19:53:47 UTC

[jaideepr97]

not sure why the API conformance test is failing all of a sudden
Its complaining about the toolgroups/tool_runtime stuff being removed from the llama-stack-spec.yaml but isn't that expected behavior when it is moved into deprecated-llama-stack-spec.yaml?

[cdoern]

I think stainless wasn't running + CI was green due to the lack of GH actions over the last week @jaideepr97 @ashwinb , this now looks accurate to what I'd expect from a PR like this.

[cdoern]

conformance should pass because of the !

[ashwinb]

lgtm