moonshot provider model list is four generations stale — Kimi K3 / K2.7 / K2.6 / K2.5 all missing

[sophiaashi]

What's wrong

src/data/models.json lists exactly three models under the moonshot provider:

moonshot-v1-8k
moonshot-v1-32k
moonshot-v1-128k

Those are the pre-Kimi-K series. Moonshot has shipped four model generations since, and none of them are listed, so anyone browsing the gateway's model catalog sees a Moonshot integration that looks abandoned even though src/providers/moonshot/ works fine with the newer IDs.

Missing entries

Model IDs as served by Moonshot's own API today (2026-07-28), cross-checked against the same slugs on OpenRouter's GET /api/v1/models:

Model ID	Notes
kimi-k3	Current flagship. 1M context, open weights released 2026-07-27
kimi-k2.7-code	Coding-specialised
kimi-k2.6
kimi-k2.5	Previous flagship, vision + text

K3 is the one most likely to be asked for right now — it went open-weight last week and is already carried by OpenRouter, Novita, Fireworks, SiliconFlow, Baseten and Modal. Moonshot documents it at a 1,048,576-token context window (pricing page).

Following the existing entry shape in models.json:

{
  "id": "kimi-k3",
  "object": "model",
  "provider": { "id": "moonshot" },
  "name": "Kimi K3"
}

...and the same for the other three.

I checked and models.json carries no pricing fields at all, so this is purely a catalog-completeness fix — no cost data needed.

Happy to send a PR if you want it split that way, or if you'd rather only add K3 and leave the K2.x line alone, that's an easy trim.

---

Disclosure: I work on TeamoRouter, which is an LLM gateway and therefore broadly a competitor to Portkey. I'm not proposing anything about my own product here — this is just a stale model list I ran into while checking which gateways carry K3.