feat: openrouter provider

[lawsonoates]

Added openrouter provider to ai package

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 0954abb

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 2 packages

Name	Type
@workflow/ai	Patch
@workflow/docs-typecheck	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[vercel]

@lawsonoates is attempting to deploy a commit to the Vercel Labs Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[VaguelySerious]

This looks goo to me, though we changed the package structure slightly since this PR was made. Could you:

• Merge main
• Ensure DCO passes (your latest commit should use the -s flag in git)
• Add a changeset (npm changeset) as a patch for the @workflow/ai package
  ?

Then I'm happy to merge this PR

[lawsonoates]

should be good :)

[VaguelySerious]

Thanks! DCO doesn't seem to pass (see CI check), which is the only thing preventing me from merging this, sorry for the trouble

[pranaygp]

The goal with @workflow/ai is to match the AI SDK in compat. Since openrouter is not a package under the @ai-sdk org, I don't think we should natively support it here

You can publish this package yourself though, or potentially ship it under the @openrouter org as @openrouter/ai-sdk-provider/workflow. Or you could also open up an issue on the AI sdk repo to bring native support there in the AI sdk

---

ofcourse, as noticed in this PR, there's also not reason this has to be a package explicitly and you can simply use openrouter directly in workflow using the pattern you've shown :)

[lawsonoates]

That makes a lot of sense. At the heart of it I was trying to address the differences in using a provider from @workflow/ai vs others. From a users' perspective you wrap in a func with 'use step' evident but from @workflow/ai you don't.

Perhaps @ai-sdk/provider could be the only dep and all are wrapped in 'use step', making it explicit?

#570
Keen to help make workflow the best it can be!