haylan/LLM-Server
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 9 Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
tool-cassefier-model
LLM-Server/docs/research/dashscope-websearch-selfhost-options.md
T

24 KiB
Raw Permalink Blame History

Research: self-hosted alternatives to DashScope for Qwen Code's built-in web_search tool

Question: Qwen Code CLI's built-in web_search tool requires tools.webSearch.model to resolve to a "DashScope-compatible modelProviders entry." Is there any real, non-Alibaba-Cloud way to satisfy that requirement with something self-hosted — or is the already-working OmniRoute MCP + SearXNG path (docs/research/omniroute-qwen-websearch.md) the end of the road?

Answer, short version: No. The client-side code that decides whether a baseUrl is "DashScope-compatible" checks the literal hostname against a hardcoded allowlist of Alibaba-owned domains, before any request is sent — it is not a protocol-compatibility check that a look-alike server could pass. A self-hosted server cannot satisfy it, full stop, unless you fork qwen-code and delete that check. Once you've done that, the actual wire protocol (OpenAI SDK responses.create(), SSE, specific item types) is buildable (a few hundred lines), but nothing you can install off the shelf implements it today. The already-working OmniRoute MCP + SearXNG path costs nothing further and does not have this problem. Recommendation: don't build this — see §6.

1. What "DashScope Responses API" is, precisely

Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (Bailian/DashScope) added an OpenAI-compatible Responses API, layered on top of its existing Chat Completions compatible-mode surface:

  • Endpoint (per Alibaba's own docs): POST {baseUrl}/responses, where baseUrl is the region's compatible-mode base, e.g. https://dashscope.aliyuncs.com/compatible-mode/v1 (China/Beijing) or the -intl / regional *.maas.aliyuncs.com variants. Source: https://www.alibabacloud.com/help/en/model-studio/qwen-api-via-openai-responses and https://www.alibabacloud.com/help/en/model-studio/compatibility-with-openai-responses-api
  • Request shape: standard Responses API (model, input, stream, store, instructions) plus a tools array that can include {"type": "web_search"}, {"type": "web_extractor"}, {"type": "code_interpreter"} as hosted, server-side tools — the inference backend runs the search itself and streams results back, the same hosted-tool pattern as OpenAI's own Responses API web_search_preview, not a client-side function-calling round trip. Source: https://www.alibabacloud.com/help/en/model-studio/qwen-api-via-openai-responses
  • Response shape: an output array of typed items — a web_search_call item carries action: {type, query, sources: [{type: "url", url}]}; narration comes back as message items with content: [{type, text}]. Source: same page.
  • Separately, DashScope's plain Chat Completions endpoint (not Responses) has an older, unrelated enable_search boolean (passed via extra_body) for models like Qwen3.8/Qwen3.6-Plus — the docs explicitly note this older surface does not return citations/sources, which is exactly why qwen-code's built-in tool uses the Responses API instead. Source: https://docs.qwencloud.com/developer-guides/tool-calling/web-search

This is the same hosted-tool pattern as OpenAI's Responses API web_search_preview (§4 confirms this directly from qwen-code's own client code — it literally reuses the OpenAI Node SDK's responses.create() call against a DashScope base URL).

2. What qwen-code's own client code actually sends (ground truth)

Fetched directly from QwenLM/qwen-code's main branch, packages/core/src/tools/web-search.ts (1087 lines) and packages/core/src/core/openaiContentGenerator/{constants,provider/dashscope}.ts. This supersedes anything inferred from the docs pages — it's the literal implementation.

The request (web-search.ts lines 651–699):

const client = new OpenAI({
  apiKey,                    // from the resolved modelProviders entry's envKey
  baseURL: backend.baseUrl,  // the modelProviders entry's baseUrl / WEB_SEARCH_BASE_URL
  timeout: 60_000,
  defaultHeaders: { 'User-Agent': `QwenCode/${version} (...)`, ...customHeaders },
});

const tools = [{ type: 'web_search' }];
if (backend.webExtractor) tools.push({ type: 'web_extractor' });

const requestParams = {
  model: backend.modelId,
  input: `Perform a web search for the query: ${query}`,
  stream: true,
  store: false,
  instructions: SIDE_REQUEST_INSTRUCTIONS,   // a fixed system prompt, see source
  tools,
};

const stream = await client.responses.create(requestParams, { signal });

This is the official OpenAI Node SDK, so client.responses.create() literally POSTs to {baseURL}/responses with that JSON body and reads back an SSE stream — there is no DashScope-specific SDK involved at all. Anything speaking real OpenAI Responses-API SSE syntax at that path, with these two extra tool types, is protocol-compatible.

What the client parses out of the SSE stream (lines 359–509): event types response.output_item.added, response.output_item.done, response.output_text.delta, and terminal response.completed / .failed / .incomplete / .cancelled, each carrying a response object with output: WsOutputItem[] and usage.x_tools.{web_search,web_extractor}.count. Output items it understands: web_search_call (action.query/action.queries, action.sources[].url, status), web_extractor_call (urls, goal, output, status), and message (content[].text). It also defensively handles a DashScope-specific quirk: request-level failures arrive as a bare SSE event:error with {code, message, request_id} and no type/error wrapper — the OpenAI SDK doesn't recognize this shape, so qwen-code parses it itself (comment: "probe-verified"). Any replacement backend needs to emit exactly these item/event shapes, or qwen-code's parser silently ignores unrecognized item types and ultimately reports WEB_SEARCH_NO_SEARCH_PERFORMED (it treats zero web_search_call items as "no search happened," with one retry, before failing outright — see lines 883–906).

The hard gate — this is the actual finding. Before any request is sent, evaluateWebSearchGate() (lines 169–335) validates the resolved baseUrl through classifyDashScopeBaseUrl() (lines 122–157):

function classifyDashScopeBaseUrl(baseUrl: string): DashScopeBaseUrlIssue | null {
  const url = new URL(baseUrl);
  if (url.protocol !== 'https:') return 'insecure';
  const hostname = url.hostname.toLowerCase();
  const suffixes = [
    ...DASHSCOPE_REGIONAL_HOSTS,   // dashscope.aliyuncs.com, dashscope-intl.aliyuncs.com, dashscope-us.aliyuncs.com
    'maas.aliyuncs.com',
    'alibaba-inc.com',
    'aliyun-inc.com',
  ];
  return suffixes.some(s => hostname === s || hostname.endsWith('.' + s)) ? null : 'unknown-host';
}

DASHSCOPE_REGIONAL_HOSTS is defined in packages/core/src/core/openaiContentGenerator/provider/dashscope.ts as exactly ['dashscope.aliyuncs.com', 'dashscope-intl.aliyuncs.com', 'dashscope-us.aliyuncs.com'].

This means "DashScope-compatible" is not a protocol claim you can satisfy by implementing the right JSON shapes — it is a literal hostname allowlist checked client-side, before the request is even built. A self-hosted server at http://search.home, https://proxy-ai.home, or any hostname you control will be rejected with "WebSearch ... is not a DashScope-compatible endpoint" regardless of what protocol it speaks, unless its hostname ends in one of dashscope.aliyuncs.com, dashscope-intl.aliyuncs.com, dashscope-us.aliyuncs.com, *.maas.aliyuncs.com, *.alibaba-inc.com, or *.aliyun-inc.com — domains Alibaba owns, that you cannot obtain a valid TLS certificate for. (There's also a separate, unrelated DASHSCOPE_PROXY_BASE_URL env var used by the main content generator's provider-detection code (dashscope.ts lines 244–262) for header/cache-control routing through a corporate proxy — it is not consulted by classifyDashScopeBaseUrl() at all, so it does not help here either.)

The only way around this specific check is to fork qwen-code and delete or relax classifyDashScopeBaseUrl() — it's ~15 lines of open-source TypeScript, so this is not hard code-wise, but it means running a patched build of the CLI, not configuring the stock release.

3. Any self-hostable server implementing this surface today? — No

Checked the servers this task named:

  • vLLM: has a real /v1/responses implementation (https://docs.vllm.ai/en/stable/api/vllm/entrypoints/openai/responses/), and for gpt-oss models specifically supports a built-in browser tool with a pluggable, MCP-compliant external tool server in place of the default Exa-backed reference implementation (https://vllm.ai/blog/2025-08-05-gpt-oss; https://github.com/vllm-project/recipes/blob/main/OpenAI/GPT-OSS.md). This is the closest existing building block found — but it's gpt-oss/harmony specific (not Qwen), and its tool/event shapes (browser.search, browser.open harmony-channel messages) are not the same as DashScope's web_search_call/web_extractor_call items qwen-code's parser expects, so it is not drop-in — it would need a translation shim in front, at which point you're building the shim anyway and don't need vLLM in the path.
  • SGLang: Responses API support is unclear/inconsistent per its own issue tracker (https://github.com/sgl-project/sglang/issues/10038) — no usable built-in web-search tool found.
  • LiteLLM: does expose /v1/responses, but has an open bug rejecting the web_search tool type outright — "LiteLLM raises a validation error... only web_search_preview is currently allowed" (https://github.com/BerriAI/litellm/issues/14011). Its actual SearXNG integration is the unrelated standalone /v1/search REST endpoint already documented in docs/research/litellm-searxng-search.md (§1–3 there) — a sibling API to chat/responses, not a Responses-API tools:[{"type":"web_search"}] handler. It doesn't have a DashScope-mode either (https://docs.litellm.ai/docs/providers/dashscope is a plain client wrapper that calls the real dashscope.aliyuncs.com; nothing in it hosts a DashScope-shaped server).
  • LocalAI / Ollama: no Responses API or DashScope-compatible mode found in searches for either.
  • A generic "OpenAI Responses API" self-hosted shim that could be relabeled: the closest match found, teabranch/open-responses-server (185 stars, 161 commits, wraps Ollama/vLLM as a Responses API with MCP support), does not implement web_search at all — its own roadmap lists "Web search: crawl4ai" as a future item, not shipped (verified live against the repo, 2026-09-05). No other candidate turned up in repeated GitHub searches for "dashscope emulator/mock/fake server" or "responses api web_search self-hosted."

Conclusion for §3: nothing installable off the shelf implements the DashScope Responses API's web_search/web_extractor hosted-tool surface. Building it means writing your own small SSE server (see §5 sizing).

4. Is DashScope's shape "OpenAI Responses API + web_search" reused wholesale?

Yes, confirmed directly from source, not inference: qwen-code's client uses the official openai npm package's client.responses.create() against a DashScope baseURL (§2 above) — it is not a DashScope-specific SDK or protocol. OpenAI's own Responses API supports a hosted web_search_preview tool with a similar output[].type === "web_search_call" item shape (OpenAI's public Responses API docs, referenced but not independently re-fetched here since qwen-code's source is authoritative for what it actually calls). DashScope's extension is the tool name (web_search rather than web_search_preview — the exact naming mismatch LiteLLM's own open bug in §3 stumbles on) plus the additional web_extractor tool and the x_tools usage-accounting field. No existing "OpenAI Responses API shim" project was found that already emulates web_search_preview/web_search server-side against a pluggable backend (see §3) — the two hosted-tool ecosystems (OpenAI's and DashScope's) both currently require literally calling out to the vendor's own cloud; nobody has open-sourced a self-hosted stand-in for either.

5. LiteLLM specifically, re-examined against this exact requirement

docs/research/litellm-searxng-search.md already established SearXNG is a first-class LiteLLM search_provider behind the standalone /v1/search REST endpoint (its own §1–2). That endpoint is irrelevant to qwen-code's tools.webSearch.model gate: qwen-code doesn't call an arbitrary search REST endpoint, it calls POST {baseUrl}/responses on an OpenAI-SDK client with tools:[{type:"web_search"}], and gates baseUrl on the Alibaba hostname allowlist in §2. Even ignoring the hostname gate entirely (i.e. assuming a patched qwen-code build), LiteLLM's /v1/responses route currently rejects the web_search tool type per the open bug in §3 — so today, LiteLLM cannot terminate this request even as an internal component of a custom build. Nothing here changes the litellm-searxng-search.md recommendation; it remains correct and unrelated to this question.

6. Effort assessment and recommendation

Option A — patch qwen-code + hand-roll a DashScope-Responses-shaped SSE server in front of SearXNG. What it needs, concretely:

  1. Fork qwen-code, delete/relax classifyDashScopeBaseUrl() (§2) — trivial, but means building and distributing a patched CLI, and re-patching on every upstream update that touches this file or its surrounding gate logic.
  2. Write a small HTTP server exposing POST /responses that: accepts the exact request shape in §2, calls SearXNG (http://search.home, already reachable per docs/research/litellm-searxng-search.md's extra_hosts finding) for results, and streams back SSE events in the precise sequence qwen-code's parser expects (response.output_item.added / .done with a web_search_call item carrying action.sources[].url, optionally a message item with narrated text, then response.completed). No narration/LLM step is strictly required — an empty or templated message still satisfies the parser as long as at least one non-failed web_search_call item exists (§2's "no-search" check only counts search-call items, not narration quality). Realistically a few hundred lines (Node/Python + SSE), a day or so of work plus debugging the exact event ordering, error-shape (event:error quirk), and store/instructions fields the client sends but doesn't strictly require echoing back.
  3. Register this server's URL as a modelProviders entry — except the patched hostname check from step 1 is required for step 3 to pass at all, so steps 1 and 2 are both mandatory, not alternatives.
  4. Maintain the fork indefinitely against upstream qwen-code releases.

Option B — do nothing further. docs/research/omniroute-qwen-websearch.md already documents a verified, working, fully self-hosted path: OmniRoute's own omniroute_web_search MCP tool, backed by this stack's SearXNG instance, confirmed connected (qwen mcp list → Connected) and exercised end-to-end (POST /v1/search returned real results). This uses qwen-code's documented, supported, unpatched MCP-server extension point (mcpServers in settings.json) — no fork, no upstream-drift risk, no protocol shape to maintain.

Recommendation: do not build Option A. The built-in web_search tool's "DashScope-compatible" requirement is, by design in qwen-code's own source, a hostname allowlist for Alibaba's cloud — it is not a compatibility surface meant to be reimplemented, and no one else has reimplemented it either (§3). Satisfying it self-hosted requires forking and permanently maintaining a patch to code whose only purpose is to stop you from doing that. The MCP path in omniroute-qwen-websearch.md already delivers the same end-user capability (web search, backed by this stack's own SearXNG, no external API) through qwen-code's actual supported extension point, with zero ongoing fork-maintenance burden. There is no functional gap Option A would close that Option B doesn't already close today.

Open questions / unknowns

  • Whether DASHSCOPE_REGIONAL_HOSTS or the extra suffixes (maas.aliyuncs.com, alibaba-inc.com, aliyun-inc.com) ever change across qwen-code releases — checked only against the current main branch (fetched 2026-09-05); a future release could tighten or loosen this list.
  • Whether OpenAI's own web_search_preview Responses-API tool has a publicly documented exact request/response JSON schema identical enough to DashScope's web_search/web_extractor pair that a single shim could serve both — not independently verified against OpenAI's own docs in this pass; qwen-code's source (§2) is authoritative for the DashScope side only.
  • Whether teabranch/open-responses-server's planned "Web search: crawl4ai" roadmap item, if shipped, would end up emitting DashScope-shaped web_search_call items or OpenAI-shaped web_search_preview ones — could become relevant later but is speculative (unshipped) as of this research.

Sources

Tried it live (2026-09-05) — confirmed empirically, plus one new fact

The user asked to actually run the experiment rather than stop at the analysis above.

What was done (all local to the WSL install, reverted afterward — nothing in this repo or the live OmniRoute instance was left changed):

  • Patched the installed CLI file ~/.local/lib/qwen-code/lib/chunks/web-search-K2FMOGS5.js with a one-line bypass in classifyDashScopeBaseUrl(): if (baseUrl.includes("proxy-ai.home")) return null;
  • Added a tools.webSearch block to ~/.qwen/settings.json pointing model/baseUrl at a new qwen-experiment-websearch modelProviders entry using OmniRoute's existing http://proxy-ai.home/v1 and the already-working OMNIROUTE_API_KEY.
  • Ran qwen with a prompt forcing use of the built-in web_search tool.

Result — the client-side gate bypass worked, confirming the research's read of classifyDashScopeBaseUrl() was accurate: qwen accepted the OmniRoute host as "DashScope-compatible" and attempted the tool call. It stopped at an interactive approval prompt first (expected — headless auto-approve wasn't attempted, since that flips on unrestricted auto-execution of every tool call at process privilege, not just this one).

New fact, not visible from static docs alone: a direct curl -X POST http://proxy-ai.home/v1/responses (with a valid key, matching the request shape qwen would send) returned {"error":{"message":"No active credentials for provider: codex.","type":"authentication_error","code":"invalid_api_key"}} — not the generic "unknown route" error a nonexistent path returns (verified earlier in this same research thread against /v1/search-adjacent bogus paths). So /v1/responses is a real, implemented OmniRoute route, not merely undocumented — the earlier inference that it didn't exist was wrong; it exists but is hardcoded to proxy exclusively through a specific provider connection OmniRoute's catalog calls codex.

codex identified via PROVIDER_REFERENCE.md: id: codex, alias cx, name "OpenAI Codex", auth type: OAuth — a real, personal ChatGPT/OpenAI-account connection, not a free/no-auth scraper provider like several others already connected in this instance (felo-web, duckduckgo-web, etc.). Checked docs/reference/ENVIRONMENT.md for any setting to redirect /v1/responses to a different provider — none exists; there is no responsesProvider or equivalent override.

Why routing isn't configurable, architecturally: OpenAI's Responses API web_search is a hosted tool — the search executes inside the model backend's own infrastructure as part of generating the response, not as a client-visible round trip. Confirmed directly against llama.cpp's own tools/server docs (github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp/tree/master/tools/server): it implements only /v1/chat/completions with client-side tool-calling (the model emits a tool_call; the client must execute it), has no /v1/responses endpoint, no hosted-tool execution, and its built-in --tools are local-only (read_file, grep_search, exec_shell_command, etc.) — none make outbound HTTP requests. So even with configurable routing, pointing /v1/responses at the local Qwen model wouldn't work: the upstream llama-server has nothing that could serve the hosted-tool half of the contract. Building that would mean OmniRoute (or a custom shim) intercepting the model's tool-call mid-generation and splicing in a real search — the same shim work priced out as not-worth-it earlier in this document, now confirmed to be the only way, not one option among several.

Conclusion holds, sharpened: the dead end isn't just qwen-code's client-side hostname check anymore — even a fully self-hosted, hostname-gate-bypassed setup terminates at OmniRoute's codex-only /v1/responses routing, which itself terminates at needing a real OpenAI/ChatGPT OAuth account, which is exactly the kind of external paid dependency this whole line of inquiry was trying to avoid. omniroute_web_search via MCP (already working, already free, already self-hosted) remains the only path that actually satisfies the original goal.

Revert: both the CLI patch and the settings.json changes were reverted after the test — omniroute-search MCP confirmed still Connected via qwen mcp list afterward. No lasting changes from this experiment.

Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink