Last reviewed: 2026-05-19
Direct answer
Choose the CometAPI Chat Completions reference when your team is maintaining, validating, or smoke-testing a chat-completions style text workflow. Choose the CometAPI Responses reference when your team is evaluating a Responses-style text workflow and can verify its request and response contract directly from the official Responses page before implementation.
The safe operator rule is simple: do not treat the two references as interchangeable until you have checked the current official pages for endpoint path, authentication expectations, request fields, response fields, error shape, and example payloads. If your production path already depends on chat completions, start with the chat completions page and compare the Responses page only as a separate migration or evaluation track.
For a deeper same-site checklist focused on chat-completions validation, see Validate CometAPI Chat Completions for Production.
Who this is for
This guide is for operators, integration owners, and release reviewers who need a safe way to decide which CometAPI text reference to inspect before a smoke test, migration review, or implementation handoff. It is not a pricing, model-availability, quota, or uptime guide; those details must be verified in the appropriate official account or documentation surfaces before release.
Key takeaways
- Use the official Chat Completions page as the source for chat-completions contract checks.
- Use the official Responses page as the source for Responses contract checks.
- Keep each smoke test narrow: one happy-path request plan, one error-path check, and a short set of assertions.
- Do not assume endpoint paths, authentication details, request fields, response fields, model identifiers, pricing, rate limits, or billing behavior from memory.
- Record only sanitized pass/fail evidence after the smoke test; do not store credentials, full prompts, full responses, or account-specific commercial data in the test log.
Sources checked
- Official CometAPI Chat Completions reference - accessed 2026-05-19; purpose: verify that the current Chat Completions reference is reachable for contract checks.
- Official CometAPI Responses reference - accessed 2026-05-19; purpose: verify that the current Responses reference is reachable for contract checks.
- CometAPI documentation llms.txt - accessed 2026-05-19; purpose: confirm the public documentation index is reachable and describes CometAPI developer documentation coverage.
- CometAPI documentation home - accessed 2026-05-19; purpose: confirm the current documentation entry point is reachable for navigation and follow-up verification.
Contract details to verify
| Area | What to verify | Source URL | Accessed | Safe candidate wording |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chat Completions reference | Confirm the current endpoint path, supported request fields, response shape, examples, and documented error behavior for chat-completions workflows. | https://apidoc.cometapi.com/api/text/chat | 2026-05-19 | “Use the Chat Completions reference for chat-completions contract validation, then copy exact contract values only after checking the page.” |
| Responses reference | Confirm the current endpoint path, supported request fields, response shape, examples, and documented error behavior for Responses workflows. | https://apidoc.cometapi.com/api/text/responses | 2026-05-19 | “Use the Responses reference for Responses contract validation, then copy exact contract values only after checking the page.” |
| Documentation navigation | Confirm whether additional pages are needed for authentication, model selection, pricing, support, or account-specific behavior. | https://apidoc.cometapi.com/ | 2026-05-19 | “Follow the current documentation navigation for details outside the two text endpoint references.” |
| Documentation index | Confirm that relevant public documentation pages are discoverable from the documentation index before relying on them in a release checklist. | https://apidoc.cometapi.com/llms.txt | 2026-05-19 | “Use the documentation index as a discovery aid, not as a replacement for checking the endpoint page itself.” |
Smoke-test workflow
Setup assumptions:
- The operator has a non-production test environment.
- The operator has a valid test credential stored outside the article, script, and log output.
- The operator has opened the current official reference page for the endpoint style being tested.
- The operator has selected a request example only after verifying the exact fields in the official page.
Happy-path request plan:
- Choose either the Chat Completions reference or the Responses reference for this run; do not mix both in one assertion set.
- Build one minimal request from the current official example.
- Send the request from the test environment.
- Assert only that the HTTP result, response parseability, and minimum documented response fields match the current reference.
Error-path check:
- Send one intentionally invalid request that is safe for the test environment, such as a request missing a required field identified on the current reference page.
- Confirm that the response is handled as an error by the client.
- Record the status class and sanitized error category without copying full response bodies into the log.
Minimum assertions:
- The selected official reference page was reachable at test time.
- The request was built from the selected reference page, not from an old snippet.
- The client handled one expected success path.
- The client handled one expected error path.
- The log contains no credential, no full prompt, and no full response body.
The smoke test must not assert model availability, price, account balance, quota, rate limit, latency target, uptime, or billing behavior unless the operator separately verifies those details from a current official source intended for that exact claim.
Sanitized log-record template:
smoke_test_id: text-endpoint-check-YYYYMMDD-001
endpoint_family_checked: chat-completions-or-responses
reference_url: https://apidoc.cometapi.com/api/text/chat-or-responses
reference_accessed_at_utc: YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ
environment: non-production
credential_location: external-secret-store-name
happy_path_status_class: 2xx-or-other
happy_path_minimum_fields_present: true-or-false
error_path_status_class: 4xx-or-other
error_path_handled_by_client: true-or-false
redactions_confirmed: true
operator_notes: brief sanitized note
final_result: pass-or-fail
FAQ
Are Chat Completions and Responses the same endpoint?
Do not assume they are the same. Treat the Chat Completions reference and the Responses reference as separate contract sources until the current official pages prove otherwise for your implementation.
Can I copy an old request example into a new smoke test?
No. Start from the current official reference page for the endpoint family you are testing, then keep the request minimal and sanitized.
Should this guide include model IDs or prices?
No. This guide only compares which text endpoint reference to inspect. Model identifiers, pricing, billing behavior, usage limits, and account-specific availability require their own current source checks.
What should I do if the two pages appear to support similar workflows?
Pick the page that matches the endpoint family your client is actually using, then document the contract details you verified. If you are considering a migration, run a separate evaluation against the other reference rather than blending assertions.