Give llm-cost-based-ratelimit test templates the fields each scenario prices on

[Irash-Perera]

The LLM provider templates in llm-cost-based-ratelimit.feature declared only displayName. The llm-cost policy now reads token locations from the route's provider template, so a template with no extraction fields yields no model and no token counts, the cost resolves to zero, the budget never drains, and the scenarios asserting a 429 on the third request never reach it.

Each template now declares the fields its own scenario exercises, and nothing more. All 24 carry promptTokens, completionTokens and responseModel. Beyond that: the caching scenarios add cachedTokens, the Anthropic cache scenarios add the cache write fields and cacheAccounting: additive, the service tier scenarios add serviceTier, the reasoning and thinking scenarios add reasoningTokens, and the web search and geo/speed scenarios add the providerFields their calculator reads. Bedrock reads its model from the URL via pathParam.

Budgets and asserted status codes are unchanged. Every scenario was priced through the policy against the same mock payload the suite sends, and each result matches the cost documented in that scenario's comment, so each budget remains exactly two requests' worth.

Pairs with the llm-cost v1.2.0 release in wso2/gateway-controllers#304, which is the change that makes extraction template-driven.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: 6eb3c618-b315-4a86-8a93-81b46fd16638

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0ddcda1 and 1a0a5d6.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• gateway/it/features/llm-cost-based-ratelimit.feature

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Changes

The LLM cost-based rate-limit scenarios now define token and response-model mappings for provider templates. Provider-specific fields cover caching, reasoning, service tiers, web search, inference metadata, and Bedrock path-parameter model extraction.

LLM cost mappings

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Baseline token and model mappings gateway/it/features/llm-cost-based-ratelimit.feature	Generic and provider templates now map prompt tokens, completion tokens, and response models.
Provider-specific usage fields gateway/it/features/llm-cost-based-ratelimit.feature	Gemini, Anthropic, and OpenAI templates now map cached tokens, reasoning tokens, service tiers, cache accounting, and provider fields.
Bedrock model extraction gateway/it/features/llm-cost-based-ratelimit.feature	The Bedrock template maps usage tokens from the payload and the response model from a path parameter regex.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes

Change: Bug fix

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 1a0a5

The provider cost mappings are ready to merge based on the available evidence.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The description explains the problem, implementation, expected behavior, test coverage, and related pull request. It does not follow the required template and omits explicit sections for user stories,…	Rewrite the description using the repository template. Add the missing sections and provide the required details, including documentation impact, security-check answers, sample information, and test environments. Label the existing testing …

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly summarizes the main change: adding scenario-specific fields to the LLM cost-based rate-limit test templates.

Full details: Description check

Explanation

The description explains the problem, implementation, expected behavior, test coverage, and related pull request. It does not follow the required template and omits explicit sections for user stories, documentation, security checks, samples, and test environment.

Resolution

Rewrite the description using the repository template. Add the missing sections and provide the required details, including documentation impact, security-check answers, sample information, and test environments. Label the existing testing information under Unit tests and Integration tests.

• Fix all pre-merge checks with AI

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}