Hitting a service spend limit is now recognised as a usage limit rather than a vague error.
What's wrong with this entry?
A 429 response is treated as a usage-limit condition in more cases: when the body mentions a reached service spend limit, when a response header names a known limit type, or when the error message matches a known type.
- Triggered by the body text
service_spend_limit_reached. - Unconditional part of 429 handling.
service_spend_limit_reached
Strings lifted out of the shipped bundle, so the claim above can be checked against them.
Related
Other releases about the same thing. Found by shared names or similar wording; neither means one caused the other.
-
v2.1.234
Rate-limit prompts resolve model aliases to the model that actually answers
Both mention rate limit
-
v2.1.234
Quota rejections feed a new auto-resume controller
Both mention rate limit
-
v2.1.242
Lower-priority mode reports extra usage taking over, and shows an allowance percentage
Both mention rate limit