Standardize provider docstrings with capability suffixes

[Kamilbenkirane]

Summary

This PR standardizes all provider-related docstrings to consistently include capability suffixes, ensuring clarity when the same provider appears in multiple packages.

Changes

• Provider files: Updated to
• Provider files: Updated to
• Provider files: Updated to
• Provider files: Updated to
• Provider files: Updated to
• Google docstrings: Removed "Gemini" references for consistency (since image generation uses both Imagen and Gemini)

Files Changed

• 50 files updated across text-generation, image-generation, and video-generation packages
• All provider files now follow consistent docstring patterns

Benefits

• Eliminates ambiguity when providers appear in multiple packages
• Makes it immediately clear which capability each provider file serves
• Consistent naming convention across the entire codebase

[claude]

Pull Request Review: Standardize provider docstrings with capability suffixes

Summary

This PR standardizes docstrings across 50 files in text-generation, image-generation, and video-generation packages by adding capability suffixes (e.g., "for text generation", "for image generation"). The changes are well-intentioned for clarity, especially when providers appear in multiple packages.

---

✅ Strengths

1. Consistency: The PR applies the same pattern uniformly across all packages, which improves developer experience
2. Clear Intent: The docstring updates make it immediately obvious which capability each module serves
3. Low Risk: The changes are purely documentation-focused with one exception (see below)
4. Good PR Description: The summary clearly explains the motivation and scope

---

🔍 Code Quality & Best Practices

Overall: Excellent - The docstring changes follow Python conventions and maintain consistency with existing code style.

Specific observations:

• All docstrings follow the same pattern: """<Provider> <component> for <capability>."""
• The changes are minimal and surgical, touching only docstrings in most files
• No unnecessary reformatting or scope creep

---

🐛 Potential Issues

Critical - Logic Change in video-generation/client.py:

The PR includes functional changes to packages/video-generation/src/celeste_video_generation/client.py (lines 40-52) that appear unrelated to docstring standardization:

def _create_inputs(
    self, *args: str, **parameters: Unpack[VideoGenerationParameters]
) -> VideoGenerationInput:
    """Map positional arguments to Input type."""
    if args:
        return VideoGenerationInput(prompt=args[0])
    prompt: str | None = parameters.get("prompt")
    if prompt is None:
        msg = (
            "prompt is required (either as positional argument or keyword argument)"
        )
        raise ValidationError(msg)
    return VideoGenerationInput(prompt=prompt)

Issues:

1. This implementation already exists identically in text-generation/client.py and image-generation/client.py, but the diff shows it as new for video-generation
2. The change from self, prompt: str, **parameters to self, *args: str, **parameters changes the API signature
3. This is a breaking change if it wasn't already in the codebase - it changes how the method is called

Recommendation:

• If this was already merged in a previous commit, ignore this comment
• If this is new, it should be in a separate PR with proper testing and documentation as it's a functional change, not a docstring update
• Verify that this doesn't break existing code by checking if any subclasses override this method with the old signature

---

⚡ Performance Considerations

No concerns - Docstrings have zero runtime performance impact.

---

🔒 Security Concerns

No concerns - Documentation-only changes pose no security risks.

---

🧪 Test Coverage

Recommendation:

• While docstring changes don't require tests, the _create_inputs change in video-generation client should have unit tests if it's new functionality
• Suggest adding tests that verify:
  • Positional argument handling: client.generate("prompt text")
  • Keyword argument handling: client.generate(prompt="prompt text")
  • Error handling when prompt is missing

Example test structure:

def test_create_inputs_with_positional_arg():
    client = VideoGenerationClient()
    inputs = client._create_inputs("test prompt")
    assert inputs.prompt == "test prompt"

def test_create_inputs_with_keyword_arg():
    client = VideoGenerationClient()
    inputs = client._create_inputs(prompt="test prompt")
    assert inputs.prompt == "test prompt"

def test_create_inputs_missing_prompt_raises_validation_error():
    client = VideoGenerationClient()
    with pytest.raises(ValidationError, match="prompt is required"):
        client._create_inputs()

---

📝 Additional Suggestions

1. Consider adding a changelog entry if you maintain a CHANGELOG.md file
2. Import statement: The ValidationError import was added to video-generation client - verify this is intentional and properly exported from celeste.exceptions
3. Consistency check: Verify that all three client implementations (text, image, video) now have identical _create_inputs implementations - this might be a good candidate for extraction to a base class in a future refactor

---

🎯 Verdict

Approve with minor concerns ✅

The docstring standardization is excellent and should be merged. However, please clarify the video-generation/client.py changes:

• If they're intentional improvements, consider splitting them into a separate PR
• If they were already in the codebase, verify the diff is showing correctly
• Add tests for the _create_inputs method if they don't exist

Files to double-check before merge:

• packages/video-generation/src/celeste_video_generation/client.py

---

Great work on improving code documentation! The consistent capability suffixes will definitely help developers navigate the multi-package structure. 🎉