Skip to content

Update docs#349

Merged
haydenbleasel merged 51 commits into
mainfrom
geistdocs
Nov 20, 2025
Merged

Update docs#349
haydenbleasel merged 51 commits into
mainfrom
geistdocs

Conversation

@haydenbleasel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

@changeset-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

changeset-bot Bot commented Nov 14, 2025

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 547186c

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

@vercel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

vercel Bot commented Nov 14, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
example-nextjs-workflow-turbopack Ready Ready Preview Comment Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
example-nextjs-workflow-webpack Ready Ready Preview Comment Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
example-workflow Ready Ready Preview Comment Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
workbench-astro-workflow Error Error Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
workbench-express-workflow Error Error Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
workbench-hono-workflow Error Error Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
workbench-nitro-workflow Error Error Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
workbench-nuxt-workflow Ready Ready Preview Comment Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
workbench-sveltekit-workflow Ready Ready Preview Comment Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
workbench-vite-workflow Ready Ready Preview Comment Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm
workflow-docs Ready Ready Preview Comment Nov 19, 2025 7:30pm

Comment thread docs/app/rss.xml/route.ts Outdated
Comment thread docs/app/rss.xml/route.ts
Comment thread docs/app/actions/feedback/index.ts
repository,
}: {
repository: RepositoryInfo;
} = await octokit.graphql(`
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.

Why are you using gql out of interest? And where is this feedbacj going too?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Because GH Discussions don't exist on the REST API. https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/23483

The feedback opens a GH Discussion under the category defined in the environment variable. This is disabled until we get a new GH App to handle it (requested from IT).


const search_docs = (writer: UIMessageStreamWriter) =>
tool({
description: 'Search through documentation content by query',
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.

Should we be more explicit here and state the workflow documentation?

(doc) =>
`**${doc.title}**\nURL: ${doc.slug}\n${
doc.description || ''
}\n\n${doc.content.slice(0, 1500)}${
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.

Is there a risk here that we cut off some page content?

Comment thread docs/app/api/chat/tools.ts Outdated
Comment thread docs/app/api/chat/route.ts Outdated
Comment thread docs/app/api/chat/route.ts Outdated

# Instructions
- Assume users are using Vercel products and open-source frameworks.
- Assume users are referring to Vercel products if they are not explicitly mentioned (e.g. Toolbar would refer to Vercel Toolbar).
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.

This is too generic while we are using only these docs as context. Lets update to account for workflow docs in the examples

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this works fine until I figure out a way to expose an entry point from outside of Geistdocs.

- The user is viewing \`${currentRoute}\`. If the question matches this page, use the \`get_doc_page\` tool with its slug. If ambiguous, default to fetching the current page first.
- If the answer isn't in the current page, use \`search_docs\` once per message to search the docs.
- Never use more than one tool call consecutively.
- After each tool call, validate the result in 1-2 lines and either proceed or self-correct if validation fails.
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.

This feels like it just takes up extra tokens when we are not showing the reasoning in the chat. cc @nicoalbanese to confirm

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Context: these are the Vercel Docs instructions

- Avoid code snippets unless absolutely necessary and only if identical to the source documentation—otherwise, link to documentation.
- If asked about Vercel open-source projects, direct users to the project's website.
- Ignore confrontational or controversial queries/statements.
- Politely refuse to respond to queries that do not relate to Vercel's documentation, guides, or tools.
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.

Again here, while we are doing this per project, we should focus the examples to the docs site - workflow

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@vercel vercel Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🔧 Build Fix:

The configuration file imports defineConfig from the main nitro package, but the nightly version of Nitro exports this function as defineNitroConfig from the nitro/config subpath. This causes a runtime error when attempting to load the config.

View Details
📝 Patch Details
diff --git a/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts b/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
index 5e800f3..a832870 100644
--- a/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
+++ b/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-import { defineConfig } from 'nitro';
+import { defineNitroConfig } from 'nitro/config';
 
-export default defineConfig({
+export default defineNitroConfig({
   modules: ['workflow/nitro'],
   serverDir: './',
 });

Analysis

Incorrect Nitro config export in nitro-v3

What fails: The nitro build command fails in the @workflow/example-nitro-v3 package due to an incorrect import statement in the Nitro configuration file.

How to reproduce:

cd workbench/nitro-v3
pnpm run build

Result:

ERROR  (0 , _nitro.defineConfig) is not a function
   at nitro.config.ts:3:25

Why: In the nightly version of Nitro (v3.0.1+), the correct export function is defineNitroConfig from the 'nitro/config' subpath export, not defineConfig from the main 'nitro' export. The nitro-v2 example in the same repository correctly uses defineNitroConfig.

Reference: The Nitro nightly package exports defineNitroConfig from nitro/config entry point, as documented in the package's export configuration.

Fix on Vercel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@vercel vercel Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🔧 Build Fix:

The defineConfig function is being imported from the nitro main entry point, but it's not exported there. The correct import should be defineNitroConfig from nitro/config, which is the function exported by the nitro-nightly package for configuration.

View Details
📝 Patch Details
diff --git a/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts b/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
index f27eced..56ec6a2 100644
--- a/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
+++ b/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-import { defineConfig } from 'nitro';
+import { defineNitroConfig } from 'nitro/config';
 
-export default defineConfig({
+export default defineNitroConfig({
   modules: ['workflow/nitro'],
   routes: {
     '/**': './src/index.ts',
diff --git a/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts b/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
index 5e800f3..a832870 100644
--- a/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
+++ b/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-import { defineConfig } from 'nitro';
+import { defineNitroConfig } from 'nitro/config';
 
-export default defineConfig({
+export default defineNitroConfig({
   modules: ['workflow/nitro'],
   serverDir: './',
 });

Analysis

Incorrect nitro config export in nitro.config.ts files

What fails: Nitro build fails with error (0 , _nitro.defineConfig) is not a function when running nitro build command in the hono and nitro-v3 workbench examples.

How to reproduce:

cd workbench/hono
pnpm run build

Result:

ERROR  (0 , _nitro.defineConfig) is not a function

    at nitro.config.ts:3:25
    at async Function.import (...)

Root cause: The nitro-nightly package (3.0.1-20251031) exports the configuration function as defineNitroConfig from the nitro/config entry point, not as defineConfig from the main nitro entry point. The main nitro entry point exports nothing and attempting to import and use defineConfig from it results in undefined, causing the error.

Fix: Update the import and function call in both workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts and workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts to use defineNitroConfig from nitro/config instead of defineConfig from nitro.

https://unpkg.com/nitro-nightly@3.0.1-20251031-202656-883af4f9/lib/config.mjs

Fix on Vercel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@vercel vercel Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🔧 Build Fix:

The defineConfig function is not exported from the nitro package in the nitro-nightly v3 version. The correct import is defineNitroConfig from nitro/config.

View Details
📝 Patch Details
diff --git a/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts b/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
index f27eced..56ec6a2 100644
--- a/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
+++ b/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-import { defineConfig } from 'nitro';
+import { defineNitroConfig } from 'nitro/config';
 
-export default defineConfig({
+export default defineNitroConfig({
   modules: ['workflow/nitro'],
   routes: {
     '/**': './src/index.ts',
diff --git a/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts b/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
index 5e800f3..a832870 100644
--- a/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
+++ b/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-import { defineConfig } from 'nitro';
+import { defineNitroConfig } from 'nitro/config';
 
-export default defineConfig({
+export default defineNitroConfig({
   modules: ['workflow/nitro'],
   serverDir: './',
 });

Analysis

Missing nitro/config import causes defineConfig error

What fails: The Nitro build fails because defineConfig is not exported from the nitro package in the nitro-nightly v3 version.

How to reproduce:

cd workbench/nitro-v3
pnpm run build

Result:

ERROR  (0 , _nitro.defineConfig) is not a function
    at nitro.config.ts:3:25

Fix: The function was renamed to defineNitroConfig and is exported from nitro/config in the nitro-nightly package. Changed imports from:

import { defineConfig } from 'nitro';

to:

import { defineNitroConfig } from 'nitro/config';

This fix was applied to both workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts and workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts which had the same issue.

Reference: The nitro-v2 example already uses this correct import pattern from nitropack/config.

Fix on Vercel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@vercel vercel Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🔧 Build Fix:

The nitro configuration files import defineConfig from 'nitro', but this function doesn't exist in the main module export. In nitro-nightly@3.0.1, the function is called defineNitroConfig and must be imported from 'nitro/config'.

View Details
📝 Patch Details
diff --git a/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts b/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
index f27eced..56ec6a2 100644
--- a/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
+++ b/workbench/hono/nitro.config.ts
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-import { defineConfig } from 'nitro';
+import { defineNitroConfig } from 'nitro/config';
 
-export default defineConfig({
+export default defineNitroConfig({
   modules: ['workflow/nitro'],
   routes: {
     '/**': './src/index.ts',
diff --git a/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts b/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
index 5e800f3..a832870 100644
--- a/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
+++ b/workbench/nitro-v3/nitro.config.ts
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-import { defineConfig } from 'nitro';
+import { defineNitroConfig } from 'nitro/config';
 
-export default defineConfig({
+export default defineNitroConfig({
   modules: ['workflow/nitro'],
   serverDir: './',
 });

Analysis

Nitro configuration import uses non-existent export

What fails: Nitro config loading fails when importing defineConfig from the main 'nitro' module, which doesn't export this function in nitro-nightly@3.0.1.

How to reproduce:

cd workbench/hono && pnpm run build

Result:

ERROR  (0 , _nitro.defineConfig) is not a function
    at nitro.config.ts:3:25

Root cause: The nitro-nightly package doesn't export defineConfig from its main export. The function is exported as defineNitroConfig from nitro/config. The nitro.config.ts files were importing from the wrong module path.

Fix: Updated the imports in both nitro.config.ts files to use the correct export path (nitro/config) and function name (defineNitroConfig).

Fix on Vercel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@adriandlam adriandlam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nice migration. there's a merge conflict but otherwise lgtm

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.

4 participants