Related to#996; if we add this, we may want to have validation logic for other arguments too@rm-openai any opinion?

Thanks for the feedback! You're right that this could be part of a broader validation pattern. Looking at the Agent class, several other fields could benefit from similar runtime validation:

• instructions: Should validate str, callable, or None
• tools: Should validate list of Tool objects
• handoffs: Should validate list of Agent/Handoff objects

1. Should we implement validation incrementally or all at once?
2. Prefer individualisinstance checks in__post_init__ or a structured validation framework?
3. Any specific validation patterns you'd like as the SDK standard?

I'm happy if I can expand this PR to include other critical fields or use this as a foundation for incremental validation. What approach works best for the team?

Should we implement validation incrementally or all at once?

Agent class currently has 16 fields, so adding all of them may take some time. If you're fine with it, your contribution would be appreciated. Otherwise, we can later add validations to the rest of the fields after merging this PR only with name.

Prefer individual isinstance checks inpost_init or a structured validation framework?

Simply writing all logic in__post_init__ should be fine for now. Perhaps, most code would be combination ofif XXX is not None andif isinstance(V, T).

Any specific validation patterns you'd like as the SDK standard?

Checking if a value is not None and then check the type of the value would be enough. I don't think we should scan all the elements of an array and nested property values (i.e., no need to check internal values ofModelSettings, each element ofhandoffs etc.). We may want to do similar to other data classes, but in this PR, we can focus on the Agent class.

I just noticed@rm-openai started refactoring of the class -#1044 ; aligning with this change and/or working on this PR after the refactoring is done would be appreciated 🙏

Ok! will work on this after refactoring 👍

@DanielHashmi The refactoring is done, and we've been receiving the same feedback from a few users. If you have time and interest to resume this PR work, it'd be appreciated! (Otherwise, I am happy to work on the rest 👋 )

I have added validations and some tests, Can you review it and tell me what should be my next step?

@rm-openai people are not trying to intentionally pass non-string to the name property, but a few people reported that they are confused with unexpected runtime error later on when they set invalid ones. You can find the list of issues linked here:#996 Thus, having validation for Agent initialization should make sense.