Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
Authorization changes require careful policy design, integration across request handling and key metadata, backward-compatibility safeguards, and extensive security-focused testing. The UI defect is comparatively localized to model resolution in one endpoint with narrower regression risk.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/32779 5:1 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/27046

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
The left issue spans request-path normalization, endpoint routing, authorization context, and regression testing across deployment configurations; the right is more localized model-selection plumbing in one UI route. The left therefore carries greater integration and regression risk.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/32142 3:1 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/27046

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
#30008 is harder because it requires tracing configuration from persistence through runtime guardrail construction, correcting parameter propagation, and adding coverage for multiple formatting paths; #29340 is more localized to deployment-time UI routing and static fallback behavior.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/30008 3:1 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/29340

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
35430 is harder because it crosses proxy request propagation, deployment selection, provider preparation, and identifier handling across several vector-store operations, creating broader regression and compatibility risk. 23102 is substantial due to realtime streaming and SDK/provider translation, but is more focused on introducing one endpoint integration.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/35430 5:3 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/23102

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
The dashboard work spans selection state, chart-series rendering, metric switching, and integration with existing UI behavior, while the provider issue is a more localized parameter-mapping fix with targeted regression tests; therefore the dashboard work is harder.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/28234 3:1 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/33401

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
The orchestration feature spans gateway architecture, routing policy design, provider/model selection, fallback behavior, configuration, observability, and extensive integration testing. The cache propagation defect is comparatively localized to a transformation path with focused regression coverage.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/27550 10:1 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/27950

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
The right issue is harder because it requires coordinated frontend and backend changes around secret redaction, update semantics, persistence safety, and regression coverage. The left issue is comparatively contained to Azure model integration, configuration, and compatibility tests.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/28902 4:3 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/32613

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
Issue #32425 is harder because it requires correcting fallback semantics in router cooldown logic, preserving explicit zero values, and adding regression coverage across policy/default combinations. Issue #32984 is primarily a scoped model-registry metadata and pricing update.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/32425 4:1 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/32984

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
Security work carries substantially higher engineering risk due to exploit validation, remediation across authentication and request-routing boundaries, regression testing, and coordinated disclosure. The model-integration request is narrower, largely involving provider configuration, capability mapping, and targeted tests.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/34451 4:1 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/32613

Sorting LiteLLM GitHub issues by difficulty to implement. Higher = harder.

{
The left issue is harder because it spans provider metadata discovery, refresh lifecycles, configuration precedence, persistence, and compatibility across multiple backend types. The right issue is comparatively localized to provider resolution in an existing mapping path.
}
https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/27830 4:1 https://github.com/berriai/litellm/issues/23980