Skip to content

Make Unity AI Gateway governance demo more developer-friendly - #20

Closed
dmatrix wants to merge 4 commits into
databricks-solutions:mainfrom
dmatrix:improve-uaig-governance-readme-and-deps
Closed

dmatrix wants to merge 4 commits into
databricks-solutions:mainfrom
dmatrix:improve-uaig-governance-readme-and-deps

Conversation

@dmatrix

@dmatrix dmatrix commented Sep 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

Cleans up the unity_ai_gateway_governance demo so it's easier for a developer to read and run.

  • README: cut marketing/filler language, fixed typos, and corrected the broken step numbering in the model-service setup (Acts 7/8 were mis-numbered as config steps). Kept the technical gotchas developers actually need — how a guardrail block looks, the PII post_call trap, denied requests never reaching the inference table, and per-provider response shapes.
  • Notebook markdown cells: removed repetitive "solution" phrasing and marketing slop from the intro, fixed typos (Jail break, mau, Act 7 :), and tightened awkward headers. Also dropped a duplicated gw_client assignment in the agent-setup code cell.
  • Dependencies: added a pyproject.toml so the README's uv sync step works (mlflow, requests, pandas, python-dotenv, openai, jupyter) — the demo dir previously had no dependency manifest.

Verification

  • All notebook code cells compile; local modules parse; every imported symbol resolves.
  • uv lock --dry-run resolves the new manifest with no conflicts.
  • Demo author confirmed the notebook runs end-to-end with these changes.

This pull request and its description were written by Isaac.

dmatrix and others added 4 commits September 3, 2026 15:11
Add a self-contained demo showing how to govern coding-agent sprawl
(Cursor, Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, Pi) through Unity AI Gateway:
per-provider governed model services with guardrails, inference-table audit,
usage tracking, rate limiting, and MLflow tracing.

- Link the demo from the top-level README
- Default Act 2 happy-path volume to 1 clean request per agent, paced, to stay
  under shared backend and guardrail-judge per-minute limits
- Add @dmatrix to CODEOWNERS

Co-authored-by: Isaac <no-reply@databricks.com>
Rewrite the demo README to cut marketing/filler language, fix typos, and
correct the broken step numbering in the model-service setup, while keeping
the technical gotchas developers need (guardrail-block shape, PII post_call
trap, denied requests not reaching inference tables, per-provider response
shapes).

Tighten the notebook's markdown cells for the same reasons: remove repetitive
"solution" phrasing and marketing slop from the intro, fix typos ("Jail break",
"mau", "Act 7 :"), and clean up awkward headers. Also drop a duplicated
gw_client assignment in the agent-setup cell.

Add a pyproject.toml so the README's `uv sync` step works (mlflow, requests,
pandas, python-dotenv, openai, jupyter).

Co-authored-by: Isaac <no-reply@databricks.com>
djliden added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2026
Lands the content of #20 by @dmatrix. #20 could not merge because main's copy of the demo (from #19) is byte-identical to the version #20 was based on, producing add/add conflicts with nothing to reconcile. Originally authored by Jules Damji <dmatrix@comcast.net>.
@djliden

djliden commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Closing this as superseded — nothing here was rejected, and nothing on your branch was rewritten or force-pushed.

Why it couldn't be merged: main received the demo in #19 from the same source commit this branch started from (4543795). That makes README.md and ai_gateway_demo.ipynb conflict add/add even though each side is byte-identical to what the other branch replaced — main's copies are the versions this branch edits, so there was nothing to reconcile.

What I did instead: since you're out for a few weeks, I re-landed your change unchanged as #21 — commit 5a58d8b, authored by you, with a tree verified byte-identical to this branch's head (e2dcc5b). #21 is now merged into main (as cf12979), so the README cleanup, the notebook tidy-up, and the new pyproject.toml are all in.

If you'd rather this had gone another way, reopen it or ping me and we'll sort it out.

@djliden djliden closed this Sep 18, 2026
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.

2 participants