From 4c4c9cb35325d96d9276d7aa0dbb180752fa80eb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sameer Kankute <sameer@berri.ai>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2025 12:16:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] Add generate content in llm route

---
 litellm/proxy/auth/route_checks.py            | 20 +++++-
 .../proxy/auth/test_route_checks.py           | 68 +++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/litellm/proxy/auth/route_checks.py b/litellm/proxy/auth/route_checks.py
index 66973da7ee..24f53b16be 100644
--- a/litellm/proxy/auth/route_checks.py
+++ b/litellm/proxy/auth/route_checks.py
@@ -293,6 +293,9 @@ class RouteChecks:
 
         if route in LiteLLMRoutes.anthropic_routes.value:
             return True
+        
+        if route in LiteLLMRoutes.google_routes.value:
+            return True
 
         if RouteChecks.check_route_access(
             route=route, allowed_routes=LiteLLMRoutes.mcp_routes.value
@@ -315,13 +318,28 @@ class RouteChecks:
                 ):
                     return True
 
+        # Check for Google routes with placeholders like "/v1beta/models/{model_name}:generateContent"
+        for google_route in LiteLLMRoutes.google_routes.value:
+            if "{" in google_route:
+                if RouteChecks._route_matches_pattern(
+                    route=route, pattern=google_route
+                ):
+                    return True
+
+        # Check for Anthropic routes with placeholders
+        for anthropic_route in LiteLLMRoutes.anthropic_routes.value:
+            if "{" in anthropic_route:
+                if RouteChecks._route_matches_pattern(
+                    route=route, pattern=anthropic_route
+                ):
+                    return True
+
         if RouteChecks._is_azure_openai_route(route=route):
             return True
 
         for _llm_passthrough_route in LiteLLMRoutes.mapped_pass_through_routes.value:
             if _llm_passthrough_route in route:
                 return True
-
         return False
 
     @staticmethod
diff --git a/tests/test_litellm/proxy/auth/test_route_checks.py b/tests/test_litellm/proxy/auth/test_route_checks.py
index b4b7ddbd9e..ef7f2f3c30 100644
--- a/tests/test_litellm/proxy/auth/test_route_checks.py
+++ b/tests/test_litellm/proxy/auth/test_route_checks.py
@@ -181,6 +181,74 @@ def test_virtual_key_llm_api_routes_allows_google_routes(route):
     assert result is True
 
 
+@pytest.mark.parametrize(
+    "route",
+    [
+        "/v1beta/models/google-gemini-2-5-pro-code-reviewer-k8s:generateContent",
+        "/v1beta/models/gemini-2.5-flash-exp:countTokens",
+        "/v1beta/models/custom-model-name-123:streamGenerateContent",
+        "/models/google-gemini-2-5-pro-code-reviewer-k8s:generateContent",
+        "/models/gemini-2.5-flash-exp:countTokens",
+        "/models/custom-model-name-123:streamGenerateContent",
+    ],
+)
+def test_google_routes_with_dynamic_model_names_recognized_as_llm_api_route(route):
+    """
+    Test that Google routes with dynamic model names (including custom names) are recognized as LLM API routes.
+    
+    This test verifies the fix for the issue where routes like:
+    /v1beta/models/google-gemini-2-5-pro-code-reviewer-k8s:generateContent
+    were incorrectly classified as "custom admin only route" instead of LLM API routes.
+    
+    The fix adds pattern matching for Google routes with placeholders like {model_name}.
+    """
+    
+    # Test that the route is recognized as an LLM API route
+    assert RouteChecks.is_llm_api_route(route) is True
+
+
+def test_google_routes_with_dynamic_model_names_accessible_to_internal_users():
+    """
+    Test that internal users can access Google routes with dynamic model names.
+    
+    This ensures that routes like /v1beta/models/{model_name}:generateContent
+    are properly accessible to internal users and not blocked as admin-only routes.
+    """
+    
+    # Create an internal user object
+    user_obj = LiteLLM_UserTable(
+        user_id="test_user",
+        user_email="test@example.com",
+        user_role=LitellmUserRoles.INTERNAL_USER.value,
+    )
+    
+    # Create an internal user API key auth
+    valid_token = UserAPIKeyAuth(
+        user_id="test_user",
+        user_role=LitellmUserRoles.INTERNAL_USER.value,
+    )
+    
+    # Create a mock request
+    request = MagicMock(spec=Request)
+    request.query_params = {}
+    
+    # Test that calling Google route with dynamic model name does NOT raise an exception
+    try:
+        RouteChecks.non_proxy_admin_allowed_routes_check(
+            user_obj=user_obj,
+            _user_role=LitellmUserRoles.INTERNAL_USER.value,
+            route="/v1beta/models/google-gemini-2-5-pro-code-reviewer-k8s:generateContent",
+            request=request,
+            valid_token=valid_token,
+            request_data={"contents": [{"parts": [{"text": "test"}]}]},
+        )
+        # If no exception is raised, the test passes
+    except Exception as e:
+        pytest.fail(
+            f"Internal user should be able to access Google generateContent route. Got error: {str(e)}"
+        )
+
+
 def test_virtual_key_allowed_routes_with_multiple_litellm_routes_member_names():
     """Test that virtual key works with multiple LiteLLMRoutes member names in allowed_routes"""