Document public user login functions

[noahho]

Added detailed docstrings for client functions to improve documentation and usability.

Change Description

Try to be precise. You can additionally add comments to your PR, this might help the reviewer a lot.

If you used new dependencies: Did you add them to requirements.txt?

Who did you ping on Mattermost to review your PR? Please ping that person again whenever you are ready for another review.

Breaking changes

If you made any breaking changes, please update the version number.
Breaking changes are totally fine, we just need to make sure to keep the users informed and the server in sync.

Does this PR break the API? If so, what is the corresponding server commit?

Does this PR break the user interface? If so, why?

---

Please do not mark comments/conversations as resolved unless you are the assigned reviewer. This helps maintain clarity during the review process.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @noahho, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request significantly improves the developer experience by providing comprehensive documentation for the client's public API related to user authentication and client initialization. By adding detailed docstrings to key functions, users can now easily understand their purpose, parameters, and return values, which will lead to more efficient and correct integration of the TabPFN client.

Highlights

• Enhanced Documentation: Detailed docstrings have been added to several public user login and client management functions (init, reset, get_access_token, set_access_token, get_api_usage) to improve clarity and usability for developers.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request adds valuable docstrings to public functions in src/tabpfn_client/config.py, significantly improving documentation and usability. The docstrings are well-written and accurately describe what the functions do. I've identified one critical issue where a function's type hint is inconsistent with its implementation and its new docstring, which should be corrected.