Handle the case where provider is a string

Updated example

README.md

@@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ issue, ran `precommit` with o3 again and got:
 
  **RECOMMENDATION: PROCEED WITH COMMIT**
 
-Nice!
+Nice! This is just one instance - take a look at [another example here](docs/tools/precommit.md).
 
 **[📖 Read More](docs/tools/precommit.md)** - Multi-repository validation and change analysis
 

docs/tools/precommit.md

@@ -45,6 +45,57 @@ logic, everything should work as expected
 
 How beautiful is that? Claude used `precommit` twice and `codereview` once and actually found and fixed two critical errors before commit!
 
+### Real-world Example
+
+Here's an example where Claude was made to go through changes *it* was asked to make. Its recommendation 
+to **Publish all Changes** was made after a rigorous set of prompts where it examined the small set of changes 
+from different angles (performance, bugs, anti-patterns etc). After confirming that unit tests were 
+passing, it went ahead with an initial review with O3; came back clean - all good to go. O3 was happy, everything looked great.
+
+Then it shared the changes and relevant code with Gemini 2.5 Pro - the following is the outcome:
+
+```
+⏺ zen:precommit (MCP)(step: "FINAL VALIDATION COMPLETE. All changes have been thoroughly analyzed and are ready for
+                     commit. The modifications successfully fix 4 GitHub CI test failures with high-quality, defensive
+                     implementations that maintain architectural integrity and coding standards. No issues or regressions
+                      detected.", step_number: 4, total_steps: 4, next_step_required: false, findings: "COMMIT
+                     RECOMMENDATION: ✅ APPROVED\n\nSUMMARY OF CHANGES:\n✅ Fixed 4 GitHub CI test failures:\n   -
+                     test_openrouter_with_restrictions (Mock iteration issue)  \n   - test_execute_with_branching
+                     (Missing metadata)\n   - test_execute_with_revision (Missing metadata)\n   - test_metadata_preserved
+                      (Provider type AttributeError)\n\n✅ IMPLEMENTATION QUALITY VERIFIED:\n   - Defensive programming
+                     with proper type checking\n   - Error handling with meaningful fallbacks\n   - Backward
+                     compatibility maintained\n   - Coding standards followed (no hasattr/getattr in changes)\n   -
+                     Architectural patterns preserved\n\n✅ COMPREHENSIVE TESTING:\n   - All originally failing tests
+                     pass\n   - Affected functionality: 37/37 tests pass\n   - Provider systems: 16/16 tests pass  \n   -
+                      Module imports work correctly\n   - No regressions detected\n\n✅ CHANGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT:\n   -
+                     Minimal, targeted changes\n   - No security or performance concerns\n   - Maintains API
+                     compatibility\n   - Changes are well-documented with clear comments\n\nRECOMMENDATION: These changes
+                      are safe to commit and will resolve the GitHub CI failures without any negative impact.",
+  ⎿  {
+       "status": "calling_expert_analysis",
+       "step_number": 4,
+     … +169 lines (ctrl+r to expand)
+
+⏺ 🔍 Pre-Commit Validation Complete
+
+  Based on comprehensive analysis using both O3 and Gemini 2.5 Pro models, I can provide the following assessment:
+
+  ✅ APPROVED WITH CRITICAL FIX REQUIRED
+
+  The changes successfully fix all 4 GitHub CI test failures and are well-implemented with defensive programming
+  patterns. However, the expert analysis identified one critical issue that must be addressed before commit:
+
+  🚨 [HIGH PRIORITY] Critical Issue Found
+
+  Inconsistent Provider Handling in tools/base.py
+  - Location: tools/base.py line ~1833 in _create_continuation_offer_response method
+  - Problem: The defensive provider handling pattern was applied in 2 locations but missed a 3rd location
+  - Impact: Risk of AttributeError: 'str' object has no attribute 'get_provider_type' in continuation scenarios
+  - Fix Required: Apply the same defensive pattern to the missed location
+```
+
+A subtle but critical issue spotted by Gemini that both Claude + O3 missed. This is the power of running these workflows with Zen.
+
 ## Example Prompts
 
 ```

tests/test_openrouter_provider.py

@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ class TestOpenRouterAutoMode:
         assert len(available_models) > 0, "Should find OpenRouter models in auto mode"
         assert all(provider_type == ProviderType.OPENROUTER for provider_type in available_models.values())
 
-        expected_models = mock_registry.list_models()
+        expected_models = mock_registry.list_models.return_value
         for model in expected_models:
             assert model in available_models, f"Model {model} should be available"
 
@@ -190,12 +190,18 @@ class TestOpenRouterAutoMode:
         utils.model_restrictions._restriction_service = None
 
         mock_registry = Mock()
-        mock_registry.list_models.return_value = [
+        mock_models = [
             "google/gemini-2.5-flash",
             "google/gemini-2.5-pro",
             "anthropic/claude-3-opus",
             "anthropic/claude-3-sonnet",
         ]
+        mock_registry.list_models.return_value = mock_models
+
+        # Mock the resolve method to return model configs with aliases
+        mock_model_config = Mock()
+        mock_model_config.aliases = []  # Empty aliases for simplicity
+        mock_registry.resolve.return_value = mock_model_config
 
         ModelProviderRegistry.register_provider(ProviderType.OPENROUTER, OpenRouterProvider)
 

tools/base.py

@@ -1640,7 +1640,15 @@ When recommending searches, be specific about what information you need and why
                             # TEST COVERAGE: tests/test_provider_routing_bugs.py::TestProviderMetadataBug
                             provider = model_info.get("provider")
                             if provider:
-                                metadata["provider_used"] = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                                # Handle both provider objects and string values
+                                if isinstance(provider, str):
+                                    metadata["provider_used"] = provider
+                                else:
+                                    try:
+                                        metadata["provider_used"] = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                                    except AttributeError:
+                                        # Fallback if provider doesn't have get_provider_type method
+                                        metadata["provider_used"] = str(provider)
 
                         return ToolOutput(
                             status=status_key,
@@ -1684,7 +1692,15 @@ When recommending searches, be specific about what information you need and why
             if model_info:
                 provider = model_info.get("provider")
                 if provider:
-                    model_provider = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                    # Handle both provider objects and string values
+                    if isinstance(provider, str):
+                        model_provider = provider
+                    else:
+                        try:
+                            model_provider = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                        except AttributeError:
+                            # Fallback if provider doesn't have get_provider_type method
+                            model_provider = str(provider)
                 model_name = model_info.get("model_name")
                 model_response = model_info.get("model_response")
                 if model_response:
@@ -1721,7 +1737,15 @@ When recommending searches, be specific about what information you need and why
             # FEATURE: Add provider_used metadata (Added for Issue #98)
             provider = model_info.get("provider")
             if provider:
-                metadata["provider_used"] = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                # Handle both provider objects and string values
+                if isinstance(provider, str):
+                    metadata["provider_used"] = provider
+                else:
+                    try:
+                        metadata["provider_used"] = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                    except AttributeError:
+                        # Fallback if provider doesn't have get_provider_type method
+                        metadata["provider_used"] = str(provider)
 
         return ToolOutput(
             status="success",
@@ -1814,7 +1838,15 @@ When recommending searches, be specific about what information you need and why
             if model_info:
                 provider = model_info.get("provider")
                 if provider:
-                    model_provider = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                    # Handle both provider objects and string values
+                    if isinstance(provider, str):
+                        model_provider = provider
+                    else:
+                        try:
+                            model_provider = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                        except AttributeError:
+                            # Fallback if provider doesn't have get_provider_type method
+                            model_provider = str(provider)
                 model_name = model_info.get("model_name")
                 model_response = model_info.get("model_response")
                 if model_response:
@@ -1860,7 +1892,15 @@ When recommending searches, be specific about what information you need and why
                 # FEATURE: Add provider_used metadata (Added for Issue #98)
                 provider = model_info.get("provider")
                 if provider:
-                    metadata["provider_used"] = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                    # Handle both provider objects and string values
+                    if isinstance(provider, str):
+                        metadata["provider_used"] = provider
+                    else:
+                        try:
+                            metadata["provider_used"] = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                        except AttributeError:
+                            # Fallback if provider doesn't have get_provider_type method
+                            metadata["provider_used"] = str(provider)
 
             return ToolOutput(
                 status="continuation_available",
@@ -1883,7 +1923,15 @@ When recommending searches, be specific about what information you need and why
                 # FEATURE: Add provider_used metadata (Added for Issue #98)
                 provider = model_info.get("provider")
                 if provider:
-                    metadata["provider_used"] = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                    # Handle both provider objects and string values
+                    if isinstance(provider, str):
+                        metadata["provider_used"] = provider
+                    else:
+                        try:
+                            metadata["provider_used"] = provider.get_provider_type().value
+                        except AttributeError:
+                            # Fallback if provider doesn't have get_provider_type method
+                            metadata["provider_used"] = str(provider)
 
             return ToolOutput(
                 status="success",

tools/planner.py

@@ -445,9 +445,23 @@ class PlannerTool(WorkflowTool):
             step_data = self.prepare_step_data(request)
             self.branches[request.branch_id].append(step_data)
 
-            # Update metadata to reflect the new branch
+        # Ensure metadata exists and preserve existing metadata from build_base_response
-            if "metadata" in response_data:
+        if "metadata" not in response_data:
-                response_data["metadata"]["branches"] = list(self.branches.keys())
+            response_data["metadata"] = {}
+
+        # Store planner-specific metadata that should persist through workflow metadata addition
+        planner_metadata = {
+            "branches": list(self.branches.keys()),
+            "is_step_revision": request.is_step_revision or False,
+            "revises_step_number": request.revises_step_number,
+            "is_branch_point": request.is_branch_point or False,
+            "branch_from_step": request.branch_from_step,
+            "branch_id": request.branch_id,
+            "more_steps_needed": request.more_steps_needed or False,
+        }
+
+        # Update metadata while preserving existing values
+        response_data["metadata"].update(planner_metadata)
 
         # Add planner-specific output instructions for final steps
         if not request.next_step_required:

tools/workflow/workflow_mixin.py

@@ -1083,8 +1083,10 @@ class BaseWorkflowMixin(ABC):
                     "provider_used": provider_name,
                 }
 
-                # Add metadata to response
+                # Preserve existing metadata and add workflow metadata
-                response_data["metadata"] = metadata
+                if "metadata" not in response_data:
+                    response_data["metadata"] = {}
+                response_data["metadata"].update(metadata)
 
                 logger.debug(
                     f"[WORKFLOW_METADATA] {self.get_name()}: Added metadata - "
@@ -1102,7 +1104,10 @@ class BaseWorkflowMixin(ABC):
                     "provider_used": "unknown",
                 }
 
-                response_data["metadata"] = metadata
+                # Preserve existing metadata and add workflow metadata
+                if "metadata" not in response_data:
+                    response_data["metadata"] = {}
+                response_data["metadata"].update(metadata)
 
                 logger.debug(
                     f"[WORKFLOW_METADATA] {self.get_name()}: Added fallback metadata - "