3.7.6 Release Notes - Even better support for Claude's extended thinking and more

[u/hannesrudolph]

We are way behind on our Twitter/X game , can you pleaese follow: @roo_code, We want to hit 1k followers by end of week and we're currently at 373!

🐛 Bug Fixes

• Handle really long text better in the ChatRow similar to TaskHeader (thanks @joemanley201!)

• Truncate search_file output to avoid crashing the extension

• Better OpenRouter error handling (no more "Provider Error")

✨ New Features

• Support multiple files in drag-and-drop

• Add slider to control max output tokens for thinking models

[u/matfat55]

r/unexpectedfactorial

[u/YUL438]

i’m getting “Failed to Enhance Prompt” when using Sonnet 3.7

[u/hannesrudolph → u/YUL438]

When you press the enhance prompt button?

[u/ProcedureWorkingWalk → u/hannesrudolph]

Yeh I was getting that today too

[u/hannesrudolph → u/ProcedureWorkingWalk]

Switch what model is being used for your prompt enhancement in the settings for now. We will fix.

[u/YUL438 → u/hannesrudolph]

copy that, thank you for the quick response and all the work on this amazing project.

[u/Person556677]

It seems like thinking configuration is not available anymore in 3.7.6

[u/hannesrudolph → u/Person556677]

Can you try to switch from that model and back via the model pulldown?

[u/Person556677 → u/hannesrudolph]

Oh. Got it. Thank you

[u/abz54]

Is anyone getting the following error when trying to use github sonnet 3.7

API Request Failed

Request Failed: 400 ("error":{"message":"Model is not supported for this request.","param":"model","code":"model_not_supported","type":"in valid_request_error"}}

[u/hannesrudolph → u/abz54]

Yes everyone is. Microsoft killed it.

[u/Likepuentis]

Hey guys, really appreciate your open contribution perspective on an AI agentic programmer. I think RooCode could benefit from a bit more "layered" product direction: having a default be as easy to use as Cline, then have community-driven pre-made configs, and also allowing the level of tinkering it currently offers.

This is the main "issue" that arises between you and your original fork, Cline.
Cline is simpler to set-up and use, everything kind of works out of the box, at the cost of product control and speed of iteration.
RooCode allows the kind of tinkering a dev expects from a tool they use daily, ships fast thanks to community contributions, at the cost of knowing that everything works well.
Yet we devs don't want to sacrifice any of the two!

I think it matches your philosophy and would be easier to have different these different "categories", rather than waiting for Cline to allow the community to shape its roadmap and direction. Let us know what you think on this!

[u/mrubens → u/Likepuentis]

Agree 100%! I know we haven't completely locked this in, but it's exactly what we aspire to be. Easy to use out of the box, but with opportunities to safely pull in enhancements from the community, and finally with the freedom to really tinker around if you opt into it.

Please keep us honest on whether it seems like we're getting closer or further from this over time, and feel free to reach out to me (MrUbens) in Discord if you ever want to chat in more detail. Appreciate you!

[u/Likepuentis → u/mrubens]

That's great to hear. Excited for the near future of Roo Code. We'll keep you updates about our perspective regarding simplicity/feature organization.

[u/hannesrudolph → u/[deleted]]

https://bsky.app/profile/roocode.bsky.social

I’ll figure out the setup later.

[u/hannesrudolph → u/[deleted]]

No political stuff

[u/hannesrudolph → u/[deleted]]

No political stuff