openclaw - ✅(Solved) Fix [Feature]: Support service_tier parameter for AWS Bedrock models [1 pull requests, 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#63415Fetched 2026-04-09 07:54:02
View on GitHub
Comments
0
Participants
1
Timeline
1
Reactions
0
Author
Participants
Timeline (top)
labeled ×1

Allow per-model configuration of the AWS Bedrock service_tier parameter (e.g., flex, priority, standard) via OpenClaw model params, similar to how params.serviceTier already works for OpenAI and Anthropic providers.

Root Cause

Allow per-model configuration of the AWS Bedrock service_tier parameter (e.g., flex, priority, standard) via OpenClaw model params, similar to how params.serviceTier already works for OpenAI and Anthropic providers.

PR fix notes

PR #64512: feat(amazon-bedrock): support service_tier parameter for Bedrock models

Description (problem / solution / changelog)

Closes #63415

Changed files

  • docs/providers/bedrock.md (modified, +42/-0)
  • extensions/amazon-bedrock/register.sync.runtime.ts (modified, +10/-2)
  • src/agents/pi-embedded-runner/bedrock-stream-wrappers.ts (modified, +36/-0)
  • src/plugin-sdk/provider-stream-shared.ts (modified, +2/-0)

Code Example

{
  "models": {
    "providers": {
      "amazon-bedrock": {
        "models": [
          {
            "id": "mistral.mistral-large-3-675b-instruct",
            "params": {
              "serviceTier": "flex"
            }
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  }
}
RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

Summary

Allow per-model configuration of the AWS Bedrock service_tier parameter (e.g., flex, priority, standard) via OpenClaw model params, similar to how params.serviceTier already works for OpenAI and Anthropic providers.

Problem to solve

AWS Bedrock supports four service tiers — Standard, Priority, Flex, and Reserved — that allow users to trade latency for cost savings. Flex tier offers a 50% discount on eligible models (e.g., Mistral Large 3: $0.50→$0.25/M input, $1.50→$0.75/M output). Currently, OpenClaw has no way to pass this parameter to Bedrock, making it impossible to use cost-optimized flex tier from within OpenClaw.

Use case: Running Mistral Large 3 on flex tier via Bedrock for non-time-sensitive tasks (summarization, batch analysis, agentic workflows) at half the on-demand cost.

API reference: The serviceTier field goes in the top-level of the Bedrock Converse API request body: {"serviceTier": {"type": "flex"}}. It is a top-level request field, not an inferenceConfig sub-field.

Proposed solution

Extend the existing params.serviceTier mechanism (already used by OpenAI and Anthropic) to also forward to Bedrock when configured under models.providers.amazon-bedrock or per-model params:

{
  "models": {
    "providers": {
      "amazon-bedrock": {
        "models": [
          {
            "id": "mistral.mistral-large-3-675b-instruct",
            "params": {
              "serviceTier": "flex"
            }
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  }
}

Alternatives considered

This could also be done by adding support for Bedrock's addionalModelRequestFields -- This would provide maximum flexibility in passing parameters to the the Converse API. The serviceTier parameter is already used by other model providers and consistency is more important than flexibility here.

Impact

  • Affected: All Bedrock users that can tolerate flex tier's longer processing times
  • Model(s) affected: Any Bedrock model that supports flex/priority tier — confirmed examples include Mistral Large 3, DeepSeek v3.2, DeepSeek v3.1, Qwen3 variants, Amazon Nova models.
  • Severity: Medium (cost savings for workloads that can tolerate flex tier's longer processing times)
  • Frequency: Every interaction with the model
  • Consequence: higher model usage costs

Evidence/examples

params.serviceTier already works for OpenAI and Anthropic providers.

Additional information

• API detail: {"serviceTier": {"type": "flex"}} goes at top-level request body (not inside inferenceConfig)

extent analysis

TL;DR

Extend the existing params.serviceTier mechanism to forward the serviceTier parameter to Bedrock when configured under models.providers.amazon-bedrock or per-model params.

Guidance

  • Update the model configuration to include the serviceTier parameter, as shown in the proposed solution, to enable cost-optimized flex tier for Bedrock models.
  • Verify that the serviceTier parameter is correctly forwarded to the Bedrock Converse API by checking the API request body for the presence of {"serviceTier": {"type": "flex"}}.
  • Test the updated configuration with a Bedrock model that supports flex tier, such as Mistral Large 3, to ensure that the cost savings are applied correctly.
  • Consider adding support for Bedrock's additionalModelRequestFields to provide maximum flexibility in passing parameters to the Converse API, but prioritize consistency with other model providers.

Example

{
  "models": {
    "providers": {
      "amazon-bedrock": {
        "models": [
          {
            "id": "mistral.mistral-large-3-675b-instruct",
            "params": {
              "serviceTier": "flex"
            }
          }
        ]
      }
    }
  }
}

Notes

The proposed solution assumes that the serviceTier parameter is correctly handled by the Bedrock Converse API and that the flex tier is supported by the selected model.

Recommendation

Apply workaround by extending the existing params.serviceTier mechanism to support Bedrock models, as this provides a consistent and straightforward solution for enabling cost-optimized flex tier.

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