openclaw - 💡(How to fix) Fix Feature request: provider exclusion list for model picker [1 participants]

Official PRs (…)
ON THIS PAGE

Recommended Tools

×6

Utilities matched from this issue’s tags and category — try them while you read without losing context.

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

Helpful · Quick feedback

Loading…
GitHub stats
openclaw/openclaw#63185Fetched 2026-04-09 07:57:19
View on GitHub
Comments
0
Participants
1
Timeline
1
Reactions
0
Author
Participants
Timeline (top)
closed ×1

Root Cause

Problem: OpenClaw exposes all built-in provider types (openai, openai-codex, etc.) in the model picker even when the user has no intention or ability to use them. These providers cannot be removed through config edits because they are hardcoded in the OpenClaw binary.

Code Example

{
  "agents": {
    "defaults": {
      "model": {
        "excludedProviders": ["openai", "openai-codex"]
      }
    }
  }
}
RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

Feature Request: Provider Exclusion List for Model Picker

Problem: OpenClaw exposes all built-in provider types (openai, openai-codex, etc.) in the model picker even when the user has no intention or ability to use them. These providers cannot be removed through config edits because they are hardcoded in the OpenClaw binary.

Having unused providers in the model picker creates confusion and adds noise to autocomplete.

Proposed Solution:

Add a provider exclusion list in the OpenClaw config that hides specified providers from the model picker and autocomplete:

{
  "agents": {
    "defaults": {
      "model": {
        "excludedProviders": ["openai", "openai-codex"]
      }
    }
  }
}

Use Case: A user may not want certain providers visible in the picker at all (e.g., no OpenAI API access, no Codex subscription, etc.).

Alternatives Considered:

  1. Removing the built-in provider type entirely — not possible without modifying OpenClaw source
  2. Leaving them visible but requiring auth — acceptable fallback, but an exclusion list would be cleaner for UX

Environment: macOS 26.4, OpenClaw 2026.4.8, Discord channel

extent analysis

TL;DR

Implementing a provider exclusion list in the OpenClaw config to hide unused providers from the model picker is the most likely fix.

Guidance

  • To address the issue, consider adding an "excludedProviders" field to the OpenClaw config, as proposed in the issue, to filter out unwanted providers from the model picker.
  • Verify that the proposed config change does not introduce any compatibility issues with existing functionality or other config settings.
  • Evaluate the feasibility of implementing the proposed solution, potentially requiring modifications to the OpenClaw source code or waiting for an official update.
  • Assess the trade-offs of alternative solutions, such as requiring authentication for unused providers, and determine the best approach for the user experience.

Example

{
  "agents": {
    "defaults": {
      "model": {
        "excludedProviders": ["openai", "openai-codex"]
      }
    }
  }
}

This example illustrates the proposed config change to exclude specific providers from the model picker.

Notes

The implementation of the proposed solution may depend on the ability to modify the OpenClaw source code or wait for an official update. The effectiveness of the solution also relies on the correct configuration of the "excludedProviders" field.

Recommendation

Apply workaround: Implement the proposed "excludedProviders" config change, as it provides a cleaner user experience by hiding unused providers from the model picker.

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works
Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.
Easy Fix
Was it a quick fix?
Time Saver
Did it save you time?
Blocking
Was it severely blocking?
Common Issue
Are others likely hitting this too?
Flaky / Intermittent
Is it intermittent?
Verified / Reproducible
Can you reproduce it reliably?
Loading…

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

Back to top recommendations

TRENDING