feat(providers): add Adorbis AI - sovereign OpenAI-compatible gateway

[adorbistech]

Adds Adorbis AI provider with 5 department models (quick, code, writing, auto, reason).

Adorbis AI is a sovereign AI control plane routing requests across 40+ models from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google Gemini, DeepSeek, and NVIDIA through a single OpenAI-compatible API key.

• Base URL: https://api.adorbistech.com/v1
• Auth: ADORBIS_API_KEY
• Docs: https://ai.adorbistech.com/docs
• Pricing: https://ai.adorbistech.com (see pricing section)
• npm: @ai-sdk/openai-compatible

Model IDs verified via live API (GET /v1/models): adorbis/quick, adorbis/code, adorbis/writing, adorbis/auto, adorbis/reason. Files placed under models/adorbis/ subfolder to match generated IDs.

Pricing: Department routing is variable passthrough — each request routes to the best available model dynamically. No fixed USD/MTok rate applies. [cost] section omitted, consistent with other variable routers in this repo (e.g. openrouter/auto).

Release date: Adorbis AI entered public availability June 2025. last_updated reflects current API state July 2026.

Fixes model IDs from previous PR #2650.

[github-actions]

Action items

• [high] [violation] providers/adorbis/models/reason.toml:7 - Check: Reasoning models must declare reasoning_options. Why: reasoning = true with no reasoning_options fails the schema refine and the contribution checklist. Callers cannot tell whether Adorbis exposes any reasoning control on this OpenAI-compatible surface. Action: Add provider-authored reasoning_options. Use reasoning_options = [] unless Adorbis documents a verified control (for example effort or budget); if a control exists, declare it and note the exact request syntax in an adjacent comment.
• [low] [possible mistake] providers/adorbis/models/auto.toml:10 - Check: Data-changing PRs should cite first-party sources mapped to claims. Why: All five models introduce [cost] and context/output limits, but the PR body only links general docs and does not map pricing or limit values to a pricing page, model catalog, or API reference. Action: In the PR body, cite direct Adorbis sources for each material claim (USD per-million pricing and context/output limits) and state what each link supports.

[github-actions]

Action items

• [high] [violation] providers/adorbis/models/quick.toml:1 - Check: Model IDs come from the path under providers/<id>/models/ (slashes require subfolders). Why: The PR states live /v1/models IDs are adorbis/quick, adorbis/code, adorbis/writing, adorbis/auto, and adorbis/reason, but these files resolve to quick, code, writing, auto, and reason. Clients looking up the API IDs will miss the catalog entries. Action: Move each model to providers/adorbis/models/adorbis/<name>.toml (e.g. providers/adorbis/models/adorbis/quick.toml) so the injected IDs match the provider API.
• [high] [violation] providers/adorbis/models/reason.toml:8 - Check: Models with reasoning = true must declare reasoning_options. Why: reason sets reasoning = true with no reasoning_options, which fails the schema refine and omits the required control surface for this OpenAI-compatible gateway model. Action: Add reasoning_options for controls Adorbis actually exposes; use reasoning_options = [] if reasoning is always on with no verified caller control (and optionally a short adjacent API-syntax comment if a control is documented).
• [low] [possible mistake] providers/adorbis/models/auto.toml:4 - Check: release_date should reflect first public availability. Why: All five models use release_date = "2024-01-01" after earlier commits used 2026-01-01, with no source for either date—looks like a placeholder. Action: Set each release_date to the real first-public date (or the best documented approximation) and cite that source in the PR body.
• [low] [possible mistake] providers/adorbis/models/auto.toml:12 - Check: Data-changing PRs should cite first-party pricing/docs mapped to claims. Why: Costs (0.10/0.30, 0.30/1.20, 0.50/2.00) and limits are introduced without a pricing or model-spec citation tied to those values, so reviewers cannot validate them from the PR alone. Action: In the PR body, link the Adorbis pricing/docs pages and state which costs and limits each source supports.

[github-actions]

Action items

• [high] [violation] providers/adorbis/models/auto.toml:1 - Check: Model IDs must match the provider API ID via the path under models/ (slashes → nested folders). Why: The PR states live /v1/models IDs are adorbis/quick, adorbis/code, adorbis/writing, adorbis/auto, and adorbis/reason, but these files resolve to bare IDs (auto, code, quick, reason, writing). Clients using the catalog would call the wrong model names. Action: Move files to providers/adorbis/models/adorbis/<id>.toml (e.g. .../adorbis/auto.toml) so generated IDs match the live API, or correct the claimed API IDs if the bare names are actually what the endpoint expects.
• [low] [possible mistake] providers/adorbis/models/auto.toml:3 - Check: release_date should be the first public release date. Why: All five models use 2024-01-01, but earlier commits in this PR used 2026-01-01; the 2024 date looks like a template placeholder rather than a verified launch date. Action: Set each model’s release_date (and last_updated if needed) to the real public dates, or cite evidence for 2024-01-01.
• [low] [violation] providers/adorbis/models/auto.toml:12 - Check: Data-changing PRs should cite first-party sources mapped to claims. Why: [cost] and limits were added for all five department models, but the PR body only links general docs/API URLs and does not map pricing or context/output limits to a pricing page or model reference. Action: Add PR-body citations (pricing page and/or model docs) stating which URL supports each cost and limit value.

[github-actions]

Action items

• [medium] [possible mistake] providers/adorbis/models/adorbis/auto.toml:14 - Check: Cost values must be USD per million tokens, with non-USD source conversion documented, and fixed rates only when billing is fixed. Why: Every department TOML publishes fixed [cost] rates (e.g. auto/code/writing 0.30/1.20, quick 0.10/0.30, reason 0.50/2.00), but the PR body says pricing is in AC (1 AC = \.001, unit incomplete) and that “Department routing costs vary by underlying model tier.” That contradicts fixed catalog costs and leaves the USD conversion unverifiable; variable passthrough routers in this repo often omit cost (e.g. OpenRouter auto). Action: Confirm whether each department ID has a fixed USD/MTok rate or passthrough/variable billing. If fixed, cite the pricing page claim for each rate, convert from AC with an explicit USD rate/date in a top-of-file comment, and state that in the PR body. If variable, omit [cost] (or use another accurate representation) instead of publishing fixed numbers.

[github-actions]

No actionable findings.