feat: Add Jan API server Swagger UI

[qnixsynapse]

Describe Your Changes

• Serve OpenAPI spec (static/openapi.json) directly from the proxy server.
• Implement Swagger UI assets (swagger-ui.css, swagger-ui-bundle.js, favicon.ico) and a simple HTML wrapper under /docs.
• Extend the proxy whitelist to include Swagger UI routes.
• Add routing logic for /openapi.json, /docs, and Swagger UI static files.
• Update whitelisted paths and integrate CORS handling for the new endpoints.

Fixes Issues

• Closes feat: Add Swagger playground page to local API server #5904

Self Checklist

• Added relevant comments, esp in complex areas
• Updated docs (for bug fixes / features)
• Created issues for follow-up changes or refactoring needed

---

Important

Add Swagger UI to Jan API server, serving OpenAPI specs and static assets, with updated routing and CORS handling.

• Behavior:
  • Serve OpenAPI spec from static/openapi.json via /openapi.json endpoint in proxy.rs.
  • Implement Swagger UI under /docs with static assets (swagger-ui.css, swagger-ui-bundle.js, favicon.ico).
  • Extend proxy whitelist to include Swagger UI routes in proxy.rs.
  • Add CORS handling for new endpoints in proxy.rs.
• UI:
  • Update local-api-server.tsx to manage server start/stop with model loading state.
  • Add logic to handle API key validation and server status updates.
• Misc:
  • Close issue feat: Add Swagger playground page to local API server #5904.

^{This description was created by for 2e1d0a1. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Caution

Changes requested ❌

Reviewed everything up to 681f24f in 3 minutes and 18 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 810 lines of code in 3 files
• Skipped 2 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. src-tauri/static/openapi.json:1

• Draft comment:
  The OpenAPI spec is very comprehensive and includes both endpoints (/models, /chat/completion) and detailed schema definitions. Verify that the server URL ('http://localhost:1337/v1') and other info match your deployment. Consider splitting extremely large schema sections for improved maintainability if needed.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 30% <= threshold 50% The comment is mostly informative and asks the PR author to verify the server URL and other info, which violates the rules. However, the suggestion to consider splitting large schema sections for maintainability is a valid code suggestion.

2. src-tauri/static/swagger-ui/swagger-ui.css:1

• Draft comment:
  The swagger-ui.css asset appears to be correctly included with the full styling and a sourceMapping comment. As a minor styling best-practice, consider adding a newline at the end of the file.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 0% vs. threshold = 50% This is a minified CSS file, which means it has been processed to remove unnecessary whitespace and newlines to reduce file size. Adding a newline at the end would go against the purpose of minification. Additionally, the file already has a sourcemap comment at the end, which is the standard way to end minified files. Could there be some build tools or systems that expect files to end with newlines? Could this cause any issues in version control systems? While some tools do prefer newlines at file ends, this is a minified file where the explicit goal is to minimize size. Any tool processing minified files should be able to handle files without trailing newlines. The sourcemap comment provides a clear file ending. The comment should be deleted as it suggests modifying a minified file in a way that contradicts the purpose of minification.

Workflow ID: wflow_4KvmoE84xUbwf2uh

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[github-actions]

Barecheck - Code coverage report

Total: 32.45%

Your code coverage diff: -0.02% ▾

Uncovered files and lines

File	Lines
web-app/src/routes/settings/local-api-server.tsx	1-24, 27-29, 31-35, 37, 39-55, 57-63, 65-77, 79-81, 83-91, 94, 96-105, 108-113, 116-126, 128-129, 131, 133, 135-140, 142, 144-149, 151-152, 155-160, 163-165, 167-198, 200-210, 212-218, 220, 222-230, 232-248, 250-253, 256-265, 267-271, 273-274, 277-291, 293-294, 297-302, 304-328, 330-339, 341-346, 348-349, 352-363, 365-376, 378-383, 385

[ellipsis-dev]

Caution

Changes requested ❌

Reviewed everything up to 13028c9 in 6 minutes and 28 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 809 lines of code in 3 files
• Skipped 2 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. src-tauri/static/openapi.json:1

• Draft comment:
  The OpenAPI spec looks complete and well‐formed, covering both the /models GET and /chat/completion POST endpoints. Ensure that this file is kept up to date as the API evolves.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 0% <= threshold 50% None

2. src-tauri/static/swagger-ui/swagger-ui.css:2

• Draft comment:
  Consider adding a final newline at the end of the CSS file for consistency with best practices.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 10% vs. threshold = 50% While having a final newline is a common best practice, this appears to be a minified/compiled CSS file that was likely generated by a build tool. The sourcemap comment at the end is standard for minified files. Making manual edits to minified files is not recommended as they will be overwritten on the next build. The comment is suggesting a change that would be better handled at the build level if desired. The comment is technically correct that files should end with newlines, but am I being too dismissive of manually fixing this issue? Could there be value in having the newline even in a generated file? No - modifying generated/minified files directly is an anti-pattern. Any changes should be made to the source files or build configuration. The newline, while good practice, provides no functional benefit here. Delete the comment as it suggests manually modifying a generated file, which is not a good practice. If a final newline is desired, it should be configured in the build process that generates this file.

Workflow ID: wflow_FDV5q3HQ9mDW9X2r

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 2e1d0a1 in 2 minutes and 14 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 221 lines of code in 8 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 3 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. web-app/src/routes/settings/local-api-server.tsx:200

• Draft comment:
  Consider moving the declaration of 'isServerRunning' (defined at L220) before using it in getButtonText for better clarity.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

2. web-app/src/routes/settings/local-api-server.tsx:133

• Draft comment:
  The promise chain in toggleAPIServer is a bit nested; consider refactoring using async/await to improve readability and error handling.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was on unchanged code.

3. web-app/src/routes/settings/local-api-server.tsx:162

• Draft comment:
  A hardcoded 500ms delay is used to allow backend state update; consider extracting this value as a named constant for clarity and easier tuning.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 50% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_idphUIbl2Bue8HxU

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[louis-jan]

LGTM