.Net: Fix GeminiPromptExecutionSettings.Clone dropping Labels and CachedContent

[dfedoryshchev]

Motivation and Context

GeminiPromptExecutionSettings.Clone() rebuilds the settings through an object initializer, but two settable, serialized properties are missing from it, so cloning silently drops them:

• Labels ([JsonPropertyName("labels")])
• CachedContent ([JsonPropertyName("cached_content")])

Every other serialized property is copied in Clone(); these two are not, so a clone loses the request labels and the explicit-cache reference.

Description

• Copy Labels (as a new dictionary, matching how ExtensionData/StopSequences are cloned) and CachedContent in Clone().
• Extend PromptExecutionSettingsCloneWorksAsExpected to set and assert both properties.

Contribution Checklist

• The code builds clean without any errors or warnings
• The PR follows the SK Contribution Guidelines
• The existing tests pass
• New tests added

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR fixes a correctness issue in the .NET Google Gemini connector where GeminiPromptExecutionSettings.Clone() previously dropped two serialized, user-settable properties (Labels and CachedContent), causing cloned settings to lose request metadata and explicit caching references.

Changes:

• Update GeminiPromptExecutionSettings.Clone() to clone Labels (as a new dictionary) and copy CachedContent.
• Extend PromptExecutionSettingsCloneWorksAsExpected unit test to set and assert both labels and cached_content survive cloning.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
dotnet/src/Connectors/Connectors.Google/GeminiPromptExecutionSettings.cs	Ensures Clone() preserves Labels and CachedContent (previously omitted).
dotnet/src/Connectors/Connectors.Google.UnitTests/GeminiPromptExecutionSettingsTests.cs	Adds assertions verifying the new clone behavior for Labels and CachedContent.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[github-actions]

Automated Code Review

Reviewers: 5 | Confidence: 95% | Result: All clear

Reviewed: Correctness, Security Reliability, Test Coverage, Failure Modes, Design Approach

---

Automated review by dfedoryshchev's agents

[dfedoryshchev]

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree