Expand the Novita AI model catalog

[jax-novita]

Summary

• Expands the existing Novita AI registry entry's model catalog.
• Follows the existing registry entry format; no new code paths.

Validation

Compared against the baseline on 7c8c7b79f33f: compared_to_baseline. Pre-existing failures are left as-is.

Reviewer Notes

• The tsc baseline was already red before this change (736 pre-existing errors, caused by installing only the @open-design/web filtered workspace rather than the full monorepo — a sandbox limitation, not a repo issue). The original diff produced the identical 736 errors line-for-line, i.e. zero new errors; this revision's one-line base URL fix was not re-verified against tsc because the sandbox still lacks the full dependency set (and disk space was tighter this time than when the baseline was first recorded), but it is a pure string literal change with no type implications.
• The 6 preferredModels IDs were picked from Novita's live catalogue on 2026-07-29 and will drift over time; happy to trim or update the list, or follow whatever convention you use for retiredModels.
• apiKeyConsoleLink includes UTM parameters, mirroring the existing Atlas Cloud entry in the same file — if you'd prefer no tracking params on vendor-submitted presets, they can be dropped without affecting functionality.
• This PR is submitted by Novita itself adding its own preset entry, following the same shape as existing third-party entries (PPIO, Atlas Cloud, etc.) in KNOWN_PROVIDERS.
• The baseUrl literal was corrected in this revision. The original commit used https://api.novita.ai/v3/openai, an older path that Novita's current documentation (novita.ai/docs/guides/llm-api) no longer shows; the currently documented endpoint is https://api.novita.ai/openai. Both paths return identical, working results today (verified against /models and /chat/completions with a live key), so this was a stale citation rather than a functional break. The neighboring PPIO entry (a different vendor, api.ppinfra.com) was not touched. If your own testing shows Novita's API surface has moved again since 2026-08-01, please treat your own verification as authoritative over this PR's claim.

[lefarcen]

Thanks @jax-novita — expanding the existing Novita preset in KNOWN_PROVIDERS is a nicely scoped change.

One quick PR-body follow-up: could you add the Surface area section and tick UI, since this changes the provider/model choices shown in Settings? Also, this one will need a manual QA pass before merge, so please hold off self-merging for now — we'll loop QA in once it's merge-ready.

[PerishCode]

@jax-novita This cleanly expands the existing Novita AI BYOK preset: I verified the corrected OpenAI-compatible base URL and key-management link against Novita's current official surfaces, confirmed all six preferred model IDs are present in the live public model catalog, and checked the changed registry entry's request-path integration and diff formatting. Thanks for keeping the provider addition focused and for promptly correcting the stale endpoint—the preset is ready for the planned manual QA pass.

_{🔁 Powered by Looper · runner=reviewer · agent=codex · An autonomous AI dev team for your GitHub repos.}

[ivy-ting]

@jax-novita

Thanks for the contribution. I completed QA validation for this PR at head 19248aaa.

QA Acceptance Record

Scope:

• Novita AI BYOK provider discovery, defaults, live model catalogue, key-management link, and authentication error handling.

Verified:

• Novita appears in onboarding and the Settings OpenAI gateway preset with the expected base URL and default model.
• Novita's public models endpoint returned 200 and contained all six preferred model IDs.
• Invalid credentials produced the expected 401 authentication error without browser console errors or key leakage in daemon logs.
• Focused web tests (65 passed), registry assertions, repository guard, and full workspace typecheck passed.

Not verified:

• A successful authenticated chat completion with a real Novita API key; the shared OpenAI-compatible request path is unchanged.

Risks / notes:

• The current GitHub static jobs were cancelled while queued without running steps, so CI should be rerun separately.

Conclusion:

• Accepted.