fix: add missing icon_small_dark field

[hjlarry]

Pull Request Checklist

Thank you for your contribution! Before submitting your PR, please make sure you have completed the following checks:

Compatibility Check

• I have checked whether this change affects the backward compatibility of the plugin declared in README.md
• I have checked whether this change affects the forward compatibility of the plugin declared in README.md
• If this change introduces a breaking change, I have discussed it with the project maintainer and specified the release version in the README.md
• I have described the compatibility impact and the corresponding version number in the PR description
• I have checked whether the plugin version is updated in the README.md

Available Checks

• Code has passed local tests
• Relevant documentation has been updated (if necessary)

The code here already defines icon_small_dark. We should align this to support the Dify model plugin's dark icon for display.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @hjlarry, 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 enhances the ProviderEntity model by integrating dedicated fields for dark mode icons. This change ensures that the Dify model plugin can accurately display icons in dark themes, thereby improving the overall user interface consistency and experience for users operating in dark mode environments.

Highlights

• Model Enhancement: Introduced icon_small_dark and icon_large_dark fields to the ProviderEntity class, allowing for distinct icon representations in dark mode.
• Data Transformation Alignment: Updated the to_simple_provider method to correctly pass the newly added icon_small_dark and icon_large_dark attributes when converting a ProviderEntity to a SimpleProviderEntity.
• Dark Mode Support: Ensured alignment with existing definitions to properly support dark mode icons for the Dify model plugin, improving UI consistency.

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 the icon_small_dark and icon_large_dark fields to the ProviderEntity to align it with SimpleProviderEntity, which is a necessary fix. My review includes a couple of suggestions to improve consistency by reordering the new fields and corresponding arguments to match the order in SimpleProviderEntity, which will enhance code readability and maintainability.