think tags

[withinboredom]

Validations

• I believe this is a way to improve. I'll try to join the Continue Discord for questions
• I'm not able to find an open issue that requests the same enhancement

Problem

I noticed that using deepseek-r1 (local via ollama) for chat, the <think> tags are stripped and there is no way to differentiate between thoughts and actual output.

Solution

Maybe put <think> tags in a <summary> block?

[rantvm]

It looks like the tags are not stripped; they get copied when copying the response. The webview probably treats <think> as a <div>, so no special styling happens. I'm of similar mind about replacing the tag with <details>/<summary>.

It also looks like this has been addressed in #3840.

[toxikman]

I've updated to v0.9.259-vscode which supposedly includes #3840 and I'm still not seeing the tags or the [Thinking] / [Reasoning] buttons. It's not easy to distinguish between reasoning and answer text. Running ollama in the terminal produces the tags. Tried with both AUTODETECT and direct models of deepseek-r1:14b under ollama provider. MacOS 14.7.1

[kota-iizuka]

The implementation of #3840 seems to have an issue where the <think> tag is not displayed correctly when it is sent separately (e.g. <th in k>). Presumably the distilled model cannot process the <think> tag as one token, which causes these split submissions.

[wangjiyang]

Same issue here. Trying to remove think tag by reverse proxy. But hope it can be done via continue, which is more straight forward.

[RomneyDa]

@Patrick-Erichsen based on @kota-iizuka's point will probably need to switch to a remark plugin and remove the isReasoning etc. history logic