github-starred/ollama
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/ollama/ollama.git synced 2026-05-08 17:49:24 -05:00
Code Issues 14.5k Packages Projects Releases 122 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #8003] Allow for forcing an order of properties in structured JSON response #30880

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-04-22 10:50:59 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 3 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-22 10:50:59 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @scd31 on GitHub (Dec 9, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ollama/ollama/issues/8003

When having an LLM respond with JSON I often do something along the lines of {reasoning: "...", actual_property_i_care_about: "..."}. The idea is that the reasoning property isn't used on my end but gives the LLM the ability to think first, like with CoT. Of course, this requires the LLM to populate the reasoning term before the other terms.

With the new structured JSON response it would be nice if there were a way to enforce this. Even telling the LLM to put the elements in a specific order is ignored.

Originally created by @scd31 on GitHub (Dec 9, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ollama/ollama/issues/8003 When having an LLM respond with JSON I often do something along the lines of `{reasoning: "...", actual_property_i_care_about: "..."}`. The idea is that the `reasoning` property isn't used on my end but gives the LLM the ability to think first, like with CoT. Of course, this requires the LLM to populate the `reasoning` term before the other terms. With the new structured JSON response it would be nice if there were a way to enforce this. Even telling the LLM to put the elements in a specific order is ignored.
GiteaMirror added the feature request label 2026-04-22 10:50:59 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-22 10:51:02 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@scd31 commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2024):

I did some digging and it looks like this will require a change to llama.cpp as well as Ollama (alternatively, we could just move the json_schema_to_grammar.cpp over to Ollama and modify it there, but it would be nice to backport the improvement)

As a side note it seems like the fields are ordered alphabetically, which is a workaround at least

<!-- gh-comment-id:2526654224 --> @scd31 commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2024): I did some digging and it looks like this will require a change to llama.cpp as well as Ollama (alternatively, we could just move the `json_schema_to_grammar.cpp` over to Ollama and modify it there, but it would be nice to backport the improvement) As a side note it seems like the fields are ordered alphabetically, which is a workaround at least
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-22 10:51:04 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@rick-github commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2024):

#7978

<!-- gh-comment-id:2526670483 --> @rick-github commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2024): #7978
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-22 10:51:04 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@scd31 commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2024):

Thanks (:

<!-- gh-comment-id:2527733702 --> @scd31 commented on GitHub (Dec 9, 2024): Thanks (:
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
amd
api
app
bug
build
cli
cloud
compatibility
context-length
create
docker
documentation
embeddings
feature request
feedback wanted
good first issue
gpt-oss
gpu
harmony
help wanted
image
install
intel
js
launch
linux
macos
memory
mlx
model
needs more info
networking
nvidia
ollama.com
performance
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 python
question
registry
rendering
thinking
tools
top
vulkan
windows
wsl
No Label feature request
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/ollama#30880
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?