Repository navigation
[RFC] Skill Indexer: better skill and context selection through collect #128
Description
Whole-resource first slice and bounded comparison delivered
Current owner assessment (2026-10-25): the agreed whole-resource software slice and its required three-condition measurements are delivered. Issue #128 remains open. This is an evidence-scoped owner assessment; it does not claim the broader historical RFC is fully implemented or that an independent reviewer approved these new measurements.
- PR #129 is merged; compatibility, optional ranking, full core/required resources, budget omissions, provenance/version and canonical Bundle closure are covered by retained software evidence.
- Reused existing Skill Eval for all 36/36 frozen task/condition/repetition slots, with 34 task PASS, 0 task FAIL and 2 INCONCLUSIVE.
- Audited input/output hashes, actual model/client settings and every recorded command trace; retained every outcome, usage record, paired comparison and output.
- Reported the negative/inconclusive result without weakening the frozen quality rule or retrying an error.
| Condition | Task PASS / INCONCLUSIVE | Reported input + output tokens | Median observed client seconds |
|---|---|---|---|
| A — legacy collect, full resources available on demand | 12 / 0 | 1,103,590 | 108.290 |
| B — relevance collect, full resources available on demand | 11 / 1 | 1,330,271 | 169.113 |
| C — same owners as B, bounded whole-resource context | 11 / 1 | 1,672,708 | 108.767 |
The cohort reports 4,106,569 tokens, within the approved 8,000,000 stop-new-trials threshold and original four-hour window. The original two-trial calibration (297,623 reported tokens) remains separate. Cached input is already included in input. Actual billing may include unreported transport recovery; monetary cost is unknown.
No token saving or no-observed-quality-loss claim is accepted. C reports 342,437 more input/output tokens than B (+25.74%); its timeout prevents the prespecified all-12-C-PASS rule. B also retains an independent reconnect/TLS trace error. These are INCONCLUSIVE, not successful retries or demonstrated collect correctness defects. Descriptive paired latency is retained with caching, transport, censoring and public-fixture limitations.
Full owner evidence report, all 36 grades/outputs/hashes and paired comparisons.
Combined local record SHA-256: 654b073bd7fbf939b9210e83580e402d3a3e7527496e805d99620dd66dd32205.
Runtime/data source: 7218d48657a84f02cd2a60d1fdbbc794cfa6d49f.
Authorized parent execution: a5083d1cf037079562febc780f4fc84d0455483553763962e8b1268df66a716d;
delegated, budget-sharing unattempted tail: 971a784b63c9e2a6db630214ba1e1fc0229cfb1dd8197791f306302438346af9.
Owner decision: stop further model calls for this delivery. No task-level evidence attributes the C-only execution failure to omitted required content, so section slicing is not justified. Keep the existing whole-resource implementation; do not add a database, service or evaluator. No merge, Issue closure or broader efficacy assertion follows from completing the measurement deliverable. All trial clients have exited, the empty task workspace root was removed, and the review worktree/original evidence remain available locally.
Prior owner snapshots and original RFC — retained history, superseded execution statuses
Issue #128: whole-resource first slice delivered
Current owner continuation — bounded tail frozen for execution
The same Issue owner is continuing toward the accepted whole-resource/evaluation criteria under the human's renewed direction. The original two-trial calibration run and all first-slice evidence below are preserved separately. The authorized replacement batch has now attempted 12/36 slots: 11 task PASS, one timeout/INCONCLUSIVE, with 2053728 observed input/output tokens.
The local case/exposure adapter now catches next-trial ValueError integrity rejections, stops new trials and records a stopped status with its actual rejection reason, recorded count, usage and hash receipt. Exact runtime checks remain strict; a changed global skill inventory still stops execution. No global configuration/security/credential changes, product runtime changes or second evaluator were added.
26 offline checks passed, with zero model calls and no invocation of execute. They include the actual frozen-client-config mismatch, next-trial rejection/valid-runtime paths, and stopped status/receipt reporting. A model-free check/report on the replacement packet records 36 expected, zero recorded, not_started.
Replacement executable-plan SHA-256:
a5083d1cf037079562febc780f4fc84d0455483553763962e8b1268df66a716d.
Proposed data-plan SHA-256:
386a85851f8a9a28d33b669c6531fed841398d79878b4824eebe884555768b8f.
Local adapter SHA-256:
94cf76f18327dd5ab177291a17458f5fd20af72e17a3e0cfb2278361df8fee76.
The same six tasks, original verifier/schema/prompt, 18 exposure inputs, two repetitions, ABC/BCA/CAB order, A/B resource policy and B/C selection are unchanged. The source/data snapshot stays 7218d48657a84f02cd2a60d1fdbbc794cfa6d49f; freshly fetched canonical main is 65147a03e465dc838770474736a620e04d72337e. The relevant evaluation/collaboration paths compared against that main remain unchanged.
Bounded continuation under existing authority
The human has additionally directed the Issue owner to decide subsequent steps without asking. The owner is preparing only the 24 unattempted slots from the same authorized schedule; the timed-out slot is not retried. The overall original schedule remains 36 slots with its original balanced positions.
The continuation will share the remaining 5946272 observed-token stop threshold and the original parent deadline (1792948852.3369632 Unix seconds), instead of receiving another 8000000-token/4-hour allowance. Model/effort, task bytes, exposures, grader, 360-second client timeout and concurrency 1 stay unchanged. All 12 parent results remain immutable.
A timeout in an independent later slot will remain INCONCLUSIVE while later unattempted cases may run. The continuation will still record a stopped aggregate state if any timeout occurs; integrity rejections and non-timeout client failures still abort. This is an explicit execution-policy change under delegated ownership, not a quality-gate relaxation or a successful retry. The bounded continuation is now frozen as 971a784b63c9e2a6db630214ba1e1fc0229cfb1dd8197791f306302438346af9; 28 zero-model offline checks passed, including the unattempted-tail, cumulative-budget and original-deadline controls. Further calls use this manifest under the human's explicit subsequent-decision delegation, not an invented new exact-hash human approval.
Additional execution resources — explicitly authorized
- Keep
gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh, concurrency 1, no retries and no resumption. - Request a fresh maximum 36 trial sessions, separate from the two old calibration trials; at most 38 total across both versions if approved.
- Propose 360-second client timeout, 14400-second campaign deadline, and 8000000 observed tokens stop-new-trials threshold.
- Basis: observed old sessions used 106944 and 190679 input/output tokens; the observed maximum × 36 is 6864444. These two same-task samples do not bound the other tasks or guarantee completion.
- A final session may cross the token threshold; no monetary hard cap or underlying provider-request cap is provided. Keep C context at 65536 bytes and existing item payload limit at 262144 bytes.
- This exact version and resource request are now explicitly authorized. The human has now explicitly approved this exact replacement hash and added budget, and delegated subsequent routine decisions to the owner. Its preflight passed, and its parent process has now stopped on the dev-2/C/repeat-2 client timeout. The original stopped status/receipt and INCONCLUSIVE remain unchanged. This does not enlarge the stated resource limits or override the existing no-merge/keep-open instructions.
Next action after authorization: launch the frozen packet, retain every outcome/usage/trace, manually review actual exposure, and report all matched comparisons with preserved failures and missing results. No section slicing is supported by the current two-trial evidence. #128 stays open; the existing no-merge/keep-open constraints remain.
Owner status — authorized run stopped, 2026-10-25
PR #129 is merged at 9b2cfa75f1fc02c74913a55ed70d8d736a72c00e (2026-10-24 12:08:54 UTC). The whole-resource software slice is delivered; #128 remains open.
The human explicitly authorized execution of final plan SHA-256
8d164b0c33345d55594e42e91ff1ef2783e42be82537f02464e8fb7e223f1111
with gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh and the frozen limits. After the 22-check offline preparation, that exact packet was launched. Two of 36 task trials completed; the run then stopped before C. Overall assessment: INCONCLUSIVE.
| Task / condition / repeat | Existing verifier task grade | Client elapsed seconds | Input tokens | Output tokens | Cached input tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| dev-1 / A / 1 | PASS | 141.810 | 105104 | 1840 | 76544 |
| dev-1 / B / 1 | PASS | 172.899 | 188282 | 2397 | 158976 |
Both retained trials completed all six original verifier assertions, retained unchanged input hashes and actual launch arguments matching the frozen model/effort/client settings. Their local results, raw traces, answers, grading evidence and hash receipts are preserved. These are local owner observations, not a newly published evidence bundle or whole-Issue acceptance.
Observed input/output usage totals 297623 tokens (293386 input + 4237 output); cached input (235520) is already included in input. Monetary cost is unknown. C has no trial; 34 planned trials are missing. One public task with one A/B repetition does not establish quality noninferiority, cost savings, latency improvement or general skill efficacy.
Stop reason: the next-trial guard raised ValueError: Frozen client configuration changed, with adapter/launcher exit code 1. A global skill named inferrsi-issue appeared during the run, adding one entry to the dynamically generated disabled-skills inventory. The exact-config check refused further execution. No model substitution, budget increase, retry or resume was performed.
The frozen adapter raised before writing its normal campaign status/receipt. Its retained report consequently stays unverified / missing_retained_status_record; it was not rewritten as completed. A separate local owner assessment records the observed stopped process, two verifiable trials and exception. This terminal-record gap must be fixed in a later offline revision without weakening the runtime integrity check.
Manual inspection of all five A commands and six B commands found no recorded outside-workspace file reads, network use or packaged-script execution; input hashes remained unchanged. A did not perform a standalone core/resource read; B read the listed inference-benchmark-design/SKILL.md. Command records do not certify OS read isolation or semantic skill contribution.
Remaining owner criteria
- Whole-resource first slice merged in feat: add opt-in skill selection and context to collect #129; legacy compatibility and software evidence retained below with their original dates.
- Original A/B full-resource policy, B/C shared selection, six tasks and unchanged verifier frozen; minimal existing-Skill-Eval wiring passed 22 offline checks.
- Exact-version model execution explicitly authorized and attempted; every actual completed trial and the interruption retained.
- Prepared and offline-validated a later local execution revision for the observed ValueError guard failure; strict current-environment checks remain, and the new hash is pending budget approval.
- Reassessed scale against observed usage and prepared the explicit replacement budget proposal above; its model execution remains unapproved. No budget has been silently enlarged.
- Obtain C and broader matched task/repeat evidence, audit it and report the frozen comparisons, preserving missing/failed/inconclusive results.
- Assess Issue-level completion from that evidence; closure remains unauthorized.
Owner decision: preserve this interrupted no-resume run and do not spend more model calls under its hash. No section slicing, database, service or second evaluator is justified by these results. A new execution version requires a new freeze and review; no automatic Issue closure.
The original approved data-plan SHA-256 remains
ed9d9823181fd3d1c389478ba79028f1ba5fe86106b42608598abce84e690d0c,
source/data snapshot 7218d48657a84f02cd2a60d1fdbbc794cfa6d49f. Actual settings stayed at 36 maximum independent client sessions, concurrency 1, no retries; 180-second client timeout, 7200-second campaign budget, 300000 observed-token stop-new-trials threshold and 65536-byte C context. A session can cross the token threshold; no monetary hard cap or internal provider-request cap is claimed.
Status on 2026-10-24 (Asia/Shanghai): software first slice delivered; Issue #128 stays open.
PR #129 merged as
9b2cfa75f1fc02c74913a55ed70d8d736a72c00e. The freshly checked main is
7218d48657a84f02cd2a60d1fdbbc794cfa6d49f, which contains that merge.
All eight PR paths match the reviewed head 65bafef8ead7150ae2087c1493533e07b707f1da.
Other main changes include knowledge/source updates; current-main resource revisions
were therefore captured anew instead of copying the old pilot's revisions.
flowchart LR
A["Existing collect calls"] --> B["Same query, IDs, filters and item limits"]
C["Explicit relevance / context_bytes"] --> D["Optional ranking + complete-resource view"]
B --> E["Software contracts checked"]
D --> E
E -.-> F["Skill Eval task outcomes: proposed, not run"]
| Delivered behavior | Verified boundary |
|---|---|
| Default compatibility | No opt-in preserves the old response, identity ordering, whitespace-token AND substring query, filters and item omissions. material=True remains packaged record.json, not SKILL.md. |
| Optional ranking | Only eligible generated packaged skill records; they retain kind=knowledge. Field-weighted lexical presence, positive overlap, deterministic qualified-identity ties; ranking precedes output limits. |
| Explicit IDs and versions | Caller membership/order, aliases, collisions, package-only filters and exact revisions remain enforced. Explicit IDs are not reranked by the cue. |
| Complete core and mandatory resources | Complete canonical core, declared direct references, provenance readsets, ancestor owner licenses, retained named licenses/notices and declared third-party notices. No mandatory file is excerpted. This is not recursive expansion of every navigation link. |
| Bounded context and omissions | Context counts UTF-8 resource-body bytes across owners; control/provenance metadata is outside that body budget. Oversized mandatory sets omit the whole owner context; later smaller owners can fit. Optional skipped files and unsupported/stale contexts have explicit reasons. |
| Existing item budget | max_bytes still counts serialized existing items separately. Context does not redefine that budget or the old material payload. |
| Source identity | Owner reference, exact Bundle revision, canonical resource path, exact-byte SHA-256, whole-resource locator, attribution and limitations are retained. Stale bindings report index_unavailable, without silent substitution. |
| Existing owners | CLI exposes the opt-ins; Store delegates. Canonical Bundle still carries the full imported-library dependency closure. No generated JSON, registry, Store, database or service was added. |
Evidence:
- Fresh main checks:
PYTHONPATH=src python -m pytest tests/test_collect_selection.py -qcompleted successfully (27 tests). The frozen six-case offline pilot was replayed on main: all five labeled positive owners remain in the first three, the two required first-position cases remain first, and the no-match case stays empty. Exact current revisions and omissions are inoffline-pilot-main.json. - Retained PR validation: all four Ready CI jobs passed for reviewed head
65bafef...; Python 3.10/3.11 each had 729 passed, 9 skipped, 70 subtests passed, and both clean installed-wheel jobs passed. Its tested merge preview was content-identical to the reviewed head. These are PR-head results, not a newly run whole-suite result on current main. - Budget boundary retained: AFD's mandatory set is 72,435 bytes. At the unchanged 65,536-byte pilot budget the item is returned, the entire owner context is omitted with
context_limit, and no partial license/core is emitted. This demonstrates the omission contract, not success at the downstream task. - Scoped reviewer LGTM cleared the final license/notice P2 at the reviewed head. The PR is now merged. The old PR-follow-up automation is confirmed paused.
No model, paid evaluation or device experiment was run in this closeout. No task-quality,
token-savings, monetary-cost or latency improvement is established. Section slicing,
databases, new services and another evaluator remain outside this slice. Further
section work requires a separate proposal grounded in task evidence, not automatic
expansion or automatic Issue closure.
Code and contracts: selection helper,
collect and Bundle,
contract tests,
operation contract.
Approved three-condition design — authorized attempt stopped; see current owner status
Skill Eval plan: original collect / full selected resources / indexed context
Approval covers the data/measurement design, offline wiring and the exact execution hash recorded above. Its authorized attempt has stopped; this does not authorize changed settings, another run or Issue closure.
Plan ID: issue128-three-condition-v1.
Data-plan SHA-256: ed9d9823181fd3d1c389478ba79028f1ba5fe86106b42608598abce84e690d0c.
All conditions use main 7218d48657a84f02cd2a60d1fdbbc794cfa6d49f.
This compares API/exposure modes on one source snapshot, avoiding a simultaneous
change of knowledge versions. The retained plan has 175 input files, nine source
hashes, exact per-owner revisions and resource hashes, task/schema/grader bytes,
the shared prompt, and the complete schedule. All retained hashes were read back
and verified. At the original data-freeze stage, model trials executed were 0; the later authorized attempt is recorded above.
One evaluator, three exposures
Reuse the existing Skill Eval CodexClient, run_trial, local executor,
trace/usage handling, output schema and standalone verifier. No new task evaluator,
database, service or collect implementation is proposed. The current
skill_eval_compare CLI supports two-arm addition/update report audits; it does
not directly execute this three-condition exposure manifest.
| Condition | Selection | Available resources and reading policy |
|---|---|---|
| A: original collect | Frozen query and package filters, material=True, identity order; neither new opt-in |
Exact-revision core plus every owner-local file and mandatory declared reference/readset/legal resource for its returned owners. Read the canonical core, then needed listed resources on demand. |
| B: full selected skill resources | Identical query/filter/item bounds, with the frozen relevance cue | The identical complete-resource reading policy as A, for B's returned owners; no optional-file scoring or 65,536-byte body budget. |
| C: indexed context | Identical selection as B, with context_bytes=65536 |
Only actual context bodies, existing material/metadata and omission records returned by collect. No full-resource rescue, recollection, network or reading omitted files. |
The original collect baseline is not an abstract-only baseline. Its packaged
entrypoint remains record.json; the caller resolves the owning canonical core
and reads exact retained resource paths. A and B share this caller policy. This
policy is explicitly frozen for this experiment; results do not describe every
possible old collect caller.
For A/B, existing indexed_skill mapping validation freezes all complete
owner-local paths plus mandatory declared references/readsets/legal ancestry;
there is no lexical filtering or context-budget trimming of that set. Resource
bytes are copied from the exact package revision. These are named resource
views, not replacement canonical Bundles. The canonical Bundle keeps the whole
library dependency unchanged; unrelated library files are not implicitly exposed
as selected-skill resources. Other undeclared navigation links remain unavailable
equally to A/B; this plan introduces no recursive resolver. Packaged scripts may
be inspected as data, never executed.
Each workspace has the same task, knowledge/collect.json, and an availability
manifest. A/B also have the complete listed resource files. Each trial starts fresh.
Actual reading/use must be checked against retained execution/command traces through manual review; the existing path provides no automatic access audit or OS read confinement. Making a file available does not prove that the model used it.
B and C have identical selected owner lists in all six prepared cases. Their
comparison isolates exposure mode within that selection. A-B compares the
selection workflow with identical resource-reading policy; A-C is the combined
workflow comparison. Retain empty selections, item-limit omissions and failures.
Frozen tasks and inputs
Use the six unmodified fixtures(final_only=True) tasks from the existing pilot.
The historic dev/holdout IDs are retained for traceability; all six tasks are
already public regression inputs, not unseen holdout. Their historical latency
slices and labeled counterfactual metadata are task inputs, not new hardware
measurements. The same exact task bytes and authority apply to all conditions.
| Task | Input question | Legacy query | Relevance cue for B/C | Correct input-report verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| dev-1 | Comparable fixed-workload report | benchmark | fixed workload inference benchmark | PASS |
| dev-2 | Kernel timings claimed as service evidence | evidence | kernel microbenchmark service claim evidence | INCONCLUSIVE |
| holdout-3 | Candidate changes step count | benchmark | fixed workload shape steps concurrency | INCONCLUSIVE |
| holdout-4 | Faster candidate fails quality | evidence | quality gate benchmark evidence | FAIL |
| holdout-5 | Failed requests omitted from the report | evidence | failed requests omitted report completeness | FAIL |
| holdout-6 | Passing C1 scope without production qualification | benchmark | campaign scope fixed workload benchmark | PASS |
Common collection options: kind=knowledge, repo=inferrsi, tier=contribution,
scenario=skills.discovery, material=True, limit=3, max_bytes=262144.
The limit is a ceiling, not a promise to return three items: existing item-budget
omissions remain effective and are frozen. All selected owners, revisions, files
and omission payloads are retained in the manifest.
Quality and measurement rules
The exact existing schema/verifier checks the conjunction of input-report verdict,
claim scope, finding set, reduction within 0.02 percentage points, required evidence
keys and a nonempty explanation. Correctly rejecting a bad input report is task
PASS. Completed wrong answers are FAIL. Execution, output, verifier, input-integrity
or observed access violations are INCONCLUSIVE; never erase them or substitute a
successful retry. The explanation's meaning, broad regime/spread requirements and
statistical quality noninferiority are not graded by this existing verifier.
Freeze two identical-input repetitions per task: 12 matched groups and 36 maximum
calls. Rotate ABC, BCA, CAB by group, with one active call at a time. Each condition
occupies each position four times. No extra warmup calls. Fresh ephemeral sessions
do not eliminate provider cache or temporal drift; record cached-input usage and
keep timing conclusions descriptive.
Retain task verdicts and each assertion, raw output and hash, execution/grading
records, input-integrity/access observations, raw provider usage, input/output and
cached tokens, and elapsed seconds. Report A-B, B-C and A-C paired results per
task/repeat, including regressions, improvements, neutral, missing and inconclusive
trials. Show per-trial values and paired median differences; no silent dropping
of failed or costly trials.
Latency is the existing client execution boundary, including its tool turns,
excluding this offline resource preparation and independent verifier time. Report
verifier time separately. This is not an end-to-end collect-speed measurement.
All actual prompts, material, provenance/control metadata, tool reads and outputs
count in reported provider usage; the 65,536-byte context-body figure is not a
token estimate. Cached input is a subset of input, not added again. Missing or
partial usage makes complete token totals unknown. Monetary cost remains unknown
without actual billing observations.
Describe no observed quality loss in this regression set only if all 12 C
trials complete and pass, there is no B-PASS to C-FAIL pair, and no C-only
evaluation error. Report token/latency comparisons separately. No population-wide
noninferiority, H3/AFD engineering efficacy, monetary-cost reduction, production
qualification or overall retrieval precision follows from this small public set.
Fixed model and budget proposal
| Setting | Frozen value |
|---|---|
| Model and effort | gpt-6.1-sol, xhigh; no substitution |
| Temperature / seed | Not exposed by the existing client; no invented numeric setting |
| Calls / repeats / concurrency / retries | 36 maximum / 2 per task-condition / 1 / 0 |
| Per-trial / campaign timeout | 180 seconds / 7,200 seconds |
| Observed-token stop threshold | 300,000; stops new trials only, may be crossed by one trial |
| C context-body budget | 65,536 bytes, unchanged |
| Existing item-byte limit | 262,144 serialized item-payload bytes; envelope and context excluded |
| Retained workspace guard | 1,048,576 bytes per task-condition; actual maximum 446,957 |
| Monetary hard cap | Not available from this client; no monetary-cap claim |
Resource availability bytes are not measured model tokens. For example, the frozen
dev-2 workspace is 339,535 bytes for B and 346,644 for C, despite C's body budget.
Serialization and unchanged metadata can outweigh saved bodies. This is one reason
to measure rather than assert savings. The dev-1 C exposure explicitly omits
performance_ceiling_analysis (mandatory 170,332 bytes, 18,533 remaining); its
omission stays in the task evidence without increasing the budget.
Approval and execution boundary
The original closeout delivered the data/measurement plan. The human subsequently approved that design, bounded offline wiring to the existing run_trial, and explicit execution of the final executable-plan hash. The local adapter passed 22 offline checks; its later authorized run completed two trials and stopped on a runtime-config integrity mismatch. See the current owner status above. The local packet is not an upstream merged artifact. The interrupted run cannot be retried/resumed under its frozen no-resume policy; any later execution needs a new freeze and review.
The existing client disables global/bundled skills, plugins, apps, memory and web,
but uses broad host access rather than OS read confinement. Any execution approval
must explicitly cover the selected controlled environment. Keep source, answers,
other knowledge copies and other trials outside each workspace, list protected
roots for manual trace review, and invalidate observed exposure violations. Abort for
an unavailable model/client; do not substitute models or provision credentials.
Any changed cases, source, grader, prompt, exposure, model/settings or budget needs
a new freeze and fresh authorization. No model, paid call or workflow dispatch
was invoked during the original offline closeout; the later authorized model attempt is recorded in the current owner status.
Section slicing remains deferred. Only propose a later slice after retained
task-level results show that the complete-resource B arm solves the same task
where bounded C fails or lacks required usable material. A byte omission alone
does not establish task harm. No automatic database, service, second evaluator,
section implementation or Issue closure follows from approval of this plan.
Sources: existing evaluation contract,
current comparison boundary,
tasks/schema/prompt,
trial/client implementation,
unchanged verifier.
Original RFC — historical proposal and original inspection baseline
[RFC] Skill Indexer: better skill and context selection through collect
Proposal for discussion, not an implemented capability or an execution authorization.
Inspected baseline:28ddd06a.
Why
As the knowledge library grows, an agent needs to find the right skill and read the material needed for its task without loading unrelated resources. These are two selection levels, not two new services.
Proposal: enhance the existing collect operation with one internal Skill Indexer. Keep the existing files as canonical knowledge and the existing reader as the source of exact-version content. Do not add a competing public retrieve operation.
| Concern | Current behavior | Proposed increment |
|---|---|---|
| Skill matching | collect matches query tokens against metadata and entrypoint text; default order is identity-based |
Optional relevance selection using existing descriptions, tags and applicability |
| Context selection | material includes entrypoint text; resources can be read individually |
Optional selection of relevant reference sections, with the skill's core instructions retained |
| Bounds and identity | Explicit IDs/revisions, filters, limits, omissions and collisions | Preserve these contracts; report selected paths, sections and budget use |
Relationship to existing operations
flowchart TB
A[Agent] <-->|Request / bounded result| C[collect]
subgraph K[Knowledge]
C <-->|Select| I[Skill Indexer]
I --- D[Shared derived index]
C <-->|Read| R[Reader]
S[Knowledge Assets] -. Build .-> D
R -->|Canonical content| S
end
E[Skill Eval] --- T[New retrieval cases]
classDef existing fill:#eef5fc,stroke:#6998bf,color:#183047;
classDef proposed fill:#fff4e8,stroke:#d68a39,color:#183047;
classDef external fill:#f0f1f3,stroke:#939ba3,color:#183047;
class C,R,S,E existing;
class I,D,T proposed;
class A external;
Indexer internally handles skill matching and resource selection. The diagram is embedded as editable Mermaid so it remains visible without a separately hosted image.
- Collect remains the public operation: applies request boundaries and returns a bounded result.
- Skill Indexer is an internal, rebuildable selection aid: skill matching and resource selection share one logical index.
- Reader retrieves canonical content at the requested revision. An index hit cannot override a revision, authority or access boundary.
- Skill Eval is reused for task-level comparisons; new retrieval cases test selection and context completeness. They are tests, not another runtime service.
Blue boxes are existing capabilities; orange boxes are proposed additions; gray is the external agent. Arrows show logical interaction, not separate deployed services or Python class ownership. Existing direct read/resource operations remain available.
Reuse before adding code
| Existing owner | Reuse |
|---|---|
data/skill_library/skill-index.json, skill_catalog.py |
Registered IDs, canonical paths, metadata and resource access |
tools/build_skill_index.py, packaged knowledge projections |
Existing source bindings, hashes and drift checks; no parallel abstract generator |
knowledge_operations.py and existing adapters |
collect, identity resolution, revision checks, filtering and bounded output |
| Existing catalog/research helpers | Reuse compatible parsing/filter utilities; do not equate their ranking with collect's current matching |
| Existing Skill Eval and contract tests | Add cases and comparisons, not a new evaluation runner |
Generated packaged skill abstracts currently have kind=knowledge; checkout skills have kind=skill, and checkout cases have kind=case. Do not migrate those identities just to support indexing. Preserve the current complete resource/dependency closure and revision calculations; selective output does not authorize narrowing a Bundle. Current collect can read resource bytes while constructing bundles before query evaluation, so index-based performance gains must be measured rather than assumed. The new selection structure is disposable derived data, not another registry, Store, Bundle type or content authority.
Small first implementation
- Derive, do not duplicate. Build a local index from existing metadata, core instructions and reference headings. Associate entries with the qualified owner identity, revision, resource path and content hash. No second hand-maintained knowledge catalog.
- Use one selection implementation. Retrieve skill candidates, then select references within their owners. Start with field-weighted lexical/BM25 matching. Reuse the existing registry/projection and selection helpers first. Add an in-memory index or local SQLite FTS cache only if measurements justify it; do not introduce a database service or adopt an external framework wholesale.
- Keep core instructions intact. Resolve the canonical owning
SKILL.mdthrough existing metadata/resource mappings and return its complete body plus selected reference sections. For packaged skill abstracts, the current entrypoint isrecord.json, not that core body; this opt-in context view must not replace the existing material field. Include required context and provenance; do not return isolated steps stripped of prerequisites or limitations. Where dependencies cannot be established, use a complete resource or explicitly omit it rather than claim a safe excerpt. - Read through existing access boundaries. The index returns references; the reader resolves and validates content. Reject or rebuild stale entries instead of silently substituting another revision.
First scope: indexed packaged skill-backed entries. Other authorities and kinds retain their existing behavior. The implementation must identify skill-backed entries from their actual metadata/ownership, not assume they all have kind=skill.
Contract guardrails
| Preserve | Rule |
|---|---|
| Default calls | No new option means unchanged matching, ordering and result behavior |
| Explicit IDs | Preserve requested membership and input order; do not silently add or rerank owners |
| Filters and identities | Preserve authority/kind/filter boundaries, ambiguity handling and exact revisions |
| Existing budgets | max_bytes remains the existing serialized-item byte limit, not a token limit |
| Existing material | Do not redefine material or truncate the meaning of read/Bundle |
| New behavior | Relevance selection and reference-context expansion are explicit opt-ins on collect; final parameter names are not specified here |
| Results | Preserve existing fields; selected context must be a clearly identified, source-linked view, not a replacement canonical Bundle |
| Oversized core | Report budget insufficiency/omission; never silently cut mandatory instructions |
Keep the existing query token-AND filter intact; a new relevance cue must not silently change its meaning. Rank only eligible candidates before applying output budgets. A metadata-only prefilter must not lose existing entrypoint-text matches; index the same searchable corpus or retain the existing scan. Break ranking ties by identity. For an explicitly requested optimized mode, a missing/stale index must trigger a documented rebuild or explicit unavailability result, not a silent downgrade. New reference-context budgets and accounting are separate from existing max_bytes; token accounting must identify its tokenizer or estimation method. No workflow session, model call or automatic skill activation is required by collect.
Evidence and acceptance
| Layer | Evidence needed |
|---|---|
| Compatibility | Existing calls retain ordering, filters, identity collisions, revision and omission semantics; explicit-ID cases included |
| Index integrity | Content changes invalidate affected entries; stale revisions and cross-owner leakage are rejected; ties and rebuilds are deterministic |
| Selection | Labeled queries cover matching, confusing neighbors and no-match cases; report recall and wrong-selection rates |
| Context | Cases verify required-context coverage, provenance, complete core instructions and budget overflow behavior |
| Task outcomes | Reuse Skill Eval to compare existing collection, full selected-skill resources and indexed context; report task results, tokens and latency |
Offline checks can establish software delivery. Claims of lower context cost without losing task quality require separately authorized agent evaluation with frozen cases and comparable settings. Green CI or a retrieval score alone does not establish skill efficacy. Set pilot thresholds before measuring; retain negative or inconclusive results.
Non-goals
No separate router/assembler services, new knowledge store, mandatory embeddings/reranker, GraphRAG, generative compression, model training, automatic execution or merge gate. No bulk metadata rewrite. Existing callers need not migrate.
References and intended reuse
| Reference | Borrow | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Agent Skills specification | Metadata → core instructions → on-demand resources | Progressive disclosure does not imply multiple services or safe arbitrary body truncation |
| LlamaIndex RecursiveRetriever | Shared node identity, references and expansion across granularities | Not a ready-made skill selector; no framework adoption proposed |
| @clarvis/agent-skills | One object for discovery, loading and resource access | Small implementation; not a relevance-search solution |
| andreas-timm/skills | Local full-text index and incremental content identity | Research prototype, not validated resource-level selection |
| ToolRet | Query-to-capability retrieval evaluation | Build InferRSI-specific cases; tools are not procedural skills |
These are design references, not claims that code has already been imported. Any code reuse needs a pinned revision and license review.
Decisions to settle
- Confirm packaged skill-backed entries as the first opt-in scope; leave other kinds/authorities unchanged.
- Choose the first labeled task set and measurable selection/context thresholds before implementation acceptance.
- Decide whether resource-level selection is sufficient for the first delivery, adding section-level selection only where a complete resource is too costly.
Current contracts: knowledge operations, collect implementation, catalog search.
Activity
Dong1017 commentedon Oct 23, 2026
Owner preflight and bounded first slice
Acting as the accountable agent under the human owner's explicit delegation to implement, submit a PR and handle review unattended. The following are adopted owner decisions for this slice, not a claim of community agreement.
Baseline: latest main is
28ddd06a48128c187f093763c7f52ffdfd04a5f0, unchanged from the RFC inspection. ReuseKnowledgeReader.collect/_read/_knowledge, Bundle views/revisions, existing filters/identity resolution, generatedindex_type=packaged-skillrecords, theirsource_files/skill_documents/skill_metadata, and the packaged registry.KnowledgeStore.collectalready delegates. Keepbuild_skill_index.pyunchanged; no generated JSON edits, cache, database or new public retrieval operation.Opt-ins: Python
relevance: str | None = None,context_bytes: int | None = None; CLI--relevance,--context-bytes. Without opt-ins, return the existing envelope unchanged.reader.collect("cpu.stat.local", ids=["inferrsi.common.skills.cgroup_resource_controls"], material=True).reader.collect("cpu.stat.local", relevance="cgroupv2", context_bytes=65536, limit=3).contexts,context_omissions,context_bytes. Existing item payloads andmaterial_bytes/max_bytesstay unchanged. Each context binds owner ref and exact Bundle revision to full resources carrying path, SHA-256, whole-resource locator and text, plus sources/attribution/limitations.Resource decision: complete canonical SKILL.md plus declared references and provenance readsets are mandatory; retain owner license where present. Optional owner-local textual references/cases are ranked, never excerpted. Every skipped resource is explicit. No section selection or claim that a partial reference set is self-contained. A mandatory set that exceeds remaining context budget omits that owner's context atomically, then later smaller contexts can still fit. Budget counts exact UTF-8 body bytes across returned context resources; source/omission/control fields are outside that budget. No token estimate or hidden default budget. Missing/stale source bindings report index unavailability, never silent fallback; canonical Bundle dependency closure is unchanged.
Frozen offline pilot before implementation: package-only relevance, limit 3, context budget 65536 bytes, current packaged resource revisions; retain any negative result.
Acceptance: all five positive cases include the labeled owner in top 3; direct cgroupv2 and P2pNccl rank first; negative case selects nothing. These are deterministic software fixtures, not efficacy thresholds. Context checks require exact complete core, complete mandatory resources or atomic budget omission, exact hashes/revisions, and no cross-owner substitution. Compatibility tests cover defaults, package-only filters, caller ID order/aliases/collisions, revisions, ties, stale projections, and skipping oversized payloads without blocking smaller ones.
Expected changed files: collect owner, arguments/CLI, focused collect-selection tests, installed-package checks and operation docs. A private stateless helper only if needed to keep the owner readable. No library or generator changes.
Task comparisons remain with existing Skill Eval; no paid/model/device execution or workflow dispatch. Draft PR uses Refs #128; no merge, auto-merge or issue closure. Actual author settings verified from this turn's client metadata: Codex / gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh.
Owner continuation after interrupted evaluation
The human has directed this same Issue owner to continue until Issue acceptance is met. The existing no-closure instruction remains in force. The first software slice is merged; the exact authorized model attempt and its two retained trials/interruption are recorded in the Issue body.
The immediate bounded work is offline: fix the local three-exposure adapter's missing terminal status on a mid-run integrity rejection, preserve strict runtime checks, and rerun the existing offline wiring/negative controls. Keep the same six public task inputs, three resource exposures, model/effort and original verifier. Preserve the interrupted packet unchanged.
Then freeze a proposed replacement execution packet with a measured-usage-based resource proposal. The previous 300000-token threshold was almost consumed by two trials, so additional model spend or changed execution limits require explicit authorization for the new exact hash. No model call, merge or Issue closure is authorized by this continuation note. No section slicing, database, service or second evaluator is added. Acceptance still requires retained matched task outcomes/tokens/latency and owner evidence review; it does not require inventing a positive result.
Dong1017 commentedon Oct 25, 2026
Issue #128: whole-resource delivery and three-condition evidence
All 36/36 scheduled attempts are retained: 34 task PASS, 0 task FAIL, 2 INCONCLUSIVE. The stopped parent execution remains stopped; completing its unattempted tail does not rewrite that state or retry its timeout. The initial two-trial calibration is excluded from these 36 matched cells.
The frozen no-observed-quality-loss claim rule is not met. The evidence does not establish lower cost with preserved quality or general skill efficacy. The bounded software/measurement deliverables are complete; #128 stays open under the human's explicit instruction. No section slicing, database, service, new evaluator or further model calls are proposed from these results.
Delivered software and acceptance evidence
PR #129 merged as
9b2cfa75f1fc02c74913a55ed70d8d736a72c00e. Scoped independent LGTM covers reviewed head65bafef8ead7150ae2087c1493533e07b707f1da. All four Ready CI jobs were rechecked successful. Retained PR results report 729 passed / 9 skipped / 70 subtests per Python 3.10/3.11 and both installed-wheel jobs passed; these are historical PR-head results, not a fresh whole-suite run on current main.The retained 2026-10-24 main snapshot
7218d48657a84f02cd2a60d1fdbbc794cfa6d49fcontains #129 and matches all eight reviewed PR paths; 27 targeted collect tests passed then. The canonical main fetched for execution was65147a03e465dc838770474736a620e04d72337e; the inspected evaluation/collaboration paths were unchanged. Evaluation data and runtime stay pinned to7218d48657a84f02cd2a60d1fdbbc794cfa6d49f.Conditions and controls
A preserves identity ordering, old query semantics and material=True. A/B expose every selected owner's complete resources plus mandatory references/readsets/legal files. The written progressive policy is complete core, then needed listed resources on demand; the executed prompt permits listed core/resource reads but does not force a standalone core read. C exposes only returned context/material/metadata, keeps the 65,536 UTF-8 body-byte budget and omissions, and permits no rescue read of omitted resources. The 262,144-byte existing item limit is separate. Availability does not prove actual reading: several A/B cells read task/metadata without a standalone core read; some C cells extracted retained core content.
Model
gpt-6.1-sol, reasoning effortxhigh, native Codex client0.163.0-alpha.10.2, Windows/Python 3.13.5; temperature/seed are not exposed. Six unchanged public fixtures (historic holdout names do not mean unseen data), two repetitions, balanced ABC/BCA/CAB schedule, concurrency 1, zero trial retries, 360-second client timeout. Answers audit fixed input reports: latency-reduction figures inside answers are computed from fixture arrays, not newly measured hardware results. A correct rejection of a bad input report is task PASS. The verifier checks verdict, scope, finding set, numeric reduction, evidence keys and nonempty explanation; it does not establish semantic quality noninferiority or production performance.Human-authorized parent hash:
a5083d1cf037079562febc780f4fc84d0455483553763962e8b1268df66a716d. Owner-delegated unattempted-tail hash:971a784b63c9e2a6db630214ba1e1fc0229cfb1dd8197791f306302438346af9. The tail retains all 12 parent attempts and uses only the remaining 24 cells, remaining 5,946,272 reported-token threshold and original 4-hour deadline (Unix 1792948852.3369632). This was not a fresh 8-million-token/4-hour allocation. The original 8,000,000 threshold stops new trials and may be crossed by the final session; no monetary hard cap exists. The tail continuation policy was explicitly frozen before execution under the human's subsequent-decision delegation; it retains errors and does not relax grading.Measurements
Total reported usage for the 36 cells: 4,106,569 input/output tokens. Cached input is included in input and is not added again. Reported usage may not capture unreported upstream attempts during transport recovery; exhaustive billable tokens and monetary cost are unknown. The original calibration's 297,623 reported tokens remain separate.
In these attempted cells, C reports 342,437 more input/output tokens than B (25.74%). This is a descriptive reported-usage result, not a causal context effect or a billable-cost estimate. A token-saving claim is not supported by this cohort.
All attempted cells, including errors, remain in the descriptive usage/timing comparison. Client latency includes tool turns, excludes offline collection preparation and verifier time, and includes a timeout-censored observation. It is not end-to-end collect latency. Provider caching, transport recovery, two repetitions and public tasks prevent a causal performance claim.
Errors retained:
dev-2-C-2:agent_timeout, executiontimeout, taskINCONCLUSIVE, observed 360.210s.holdout-3-B-2:agent_trace_error, executioncompleted, taskINCONCLUSIVE, observed 201.960s.The timeout remains ungraded even where native stdout contains a final answer. The trace-error cell retains native reconnect/TLS errors. Neither is retried or promoted to PASS. No task-level evidence attributes a C-only failure to omitted required content, so section slicing is not justified by this run.
Manual review covered every retained command trace and output; inputs stayed unchanged and no outside-workspace read, model-issued task-tool network action or packaged-script execution was observed. The client had broad host access, so this is not proof of OS read confinement. All original assertions, outputs and artifact hashes are retained. Raw argv, personal runtime paths and command logs remain local; public hashes do not imply those private artifacts are publicly downloadable.
Local combined record SHA-256:
654b073bd7fbf939b9210e83580e402d3a3e7527496e805d99620dd66dd32205. The software source and existing fixture/verifier are upstream; local case wiring is not claimed as an upstream merged evaluator. No repository source changes, commits or pushes were made for this execution/evidence assembly.Prepared by Codex (
gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh); measured client settings are independently recorded above. Owner assessment, not an independent approval or authorization to close #128.All 36 trial grades, usage, latency and output hashes
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 matched task/repetition comparisons
Retained outputs (original language, including ungraded errors)
dev-1 / A / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "报告验收通过：各轮请求均值的中位数从374.170214 ms降至266.167980 ms，下降28.864466%，超过20%门槛。C1工作负载一致，质量通过，双方均完整报告15/15个请求且无失败。轮均值相对极差为4.04%和3.32%，均低于12%。结论仅适用于给定记录的固定工作负载，不代表新硬件测量或生产资格。最小下一步：记录该固定工作负载的验收结果。" }dev-1 / B / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323212, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "先计算每轮请求均值，再取各轮均值的中位数：基线374.170214毫秒，候选266.167980毫秒，降低28.864466%，达到20%门槛。两侧工作负载一致，覆盖所需C1；质量通过，候选15个请求全部报告且无失败。轮均值相对极差分别为4.041516%和3.317282%，均低于12%。因此报告判定通过，无实质合同违规。审计已完成；最小下一步是记录该固定工作负载的通过结论，不将其扩展为新的硬件实测或生产部署资格。" }dev-1 / C / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "两组工作负载一致，覆盖要求的 C1。各轮请求均值的中位数为基线 374.170214 ms、候选 266.167980 ms，下降 28.8645%，超过 20% 门槛。两组相对极差分别为 4.0415% 和 3.3173%，均低于 12%。质量通过，各组 15 个请求全部报告且无失败，因此报告通过冻结合同。最小下一步：接受并保留该固定工作负载结论；此记录审计不构成新的硬件测量或生产部署资格。" }dev-1 / B / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。逐轮计算请求均值后取中位数：基线374.170214毫秒，候选266.167980毫秒，下降28.864466%，满足至少20%的门槛。所需C1负载相同，质量通过，双方均完整报告15个请求且无失败；轮均值的极差除以中位数分别为4.04%和3.32%，均低于12%。全部冻结门槛满足。最小下一步：据此记录固定负载验收通过，并保留原始证据。结论仅针对题设记录，不代表新硬件测量或生产部署资格。" }dev-1 / C / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323212, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "报告满足冻结契约：两组负载一致，覆盖要求的 C1。先计算每轮请求均值，再取中位数，基线为 374.170214 ms，候选为 266.167980 ms，降低 28.864466%，超过 20% 门槛。轮均值极差除以中位数分别为 4.0415% 和 3.3173%，均低于 12%。质量通过，两组均完整报告 15/15 个请求且失败数为零。审计已完成；PASS 指报告验收结论。下一步仅记录此固定负载验收结果，无须补测；不推断生产或部署资格，也不视为新的硬件测量。" }dev-1 / A / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323212, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "先计算每轮请求平均延迟，再取各轮均值的中位数：基线374.170214毫秒，候选266.167980毫秒，降低28.864466%，超过20%门槛。两组负载一致，满足C1；质量通过，15/15请求完整报告且零失败。以中位数归一化的轮间极差分别为4.04%和3.32%，均低于12%。给定记录支持固定负载验收通过，不代表生产资格或新增硬件测量。最小下一步：记录该负载的验收结果并保留证据。" }dev-2 / C / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": ["unsupported_service_claim"], "claim_scope": "kernel_only", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "负载一致。每轮先取请求均值，再取各轮中位数：基线374.170214 ms，候选266.167980 ms，降低28.864466%，超过20%门槛。均值极差相对中位数分别为4.04%和3.32%，低于12%；质量通过，15/15请求完整且无失败。但证据仅为核函数计时，无法判定HTTP服务收益。最小下一步：补充相同C1负载下基线与候选的HTTP端到端重复计时，保留全部请求及质量结果，按冻结契约重新验收。" }dev-2 / A / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": ["unsupported_service_claim"], "claim_scope": "kernel_only", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。基线与候选的每轮请求均值中位数分别为374.170214和266.167980毫秒，下降28.864466%，超过20%门槛；负载一致，质量通过，15/15请求完整且无失败，波动低于12%。但证据仅为内核计时，无法判定HTTP服务收益，因此报告为INCONCLUSIVE。最小下一步：补充相同C1固定负载下的HTTP端到端对比，保留全部请求、失败及质量结果，并按同一契约验收。" }dev-2 / B / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": ["unsupported_service_claim"], "claim_scope": "kernel_only", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。分别计算每次试验的请求均值，再取中位数：基线374.170214 ms，候选266.167980 ms，下降28.864466%，超过20%门槛。工作负载一致，质量通过，全部15个请求均已报告且无失败。唯一实质问题是内核计时不能证明HTTP服务收益，因此报告结论为INCONCLUSIVE。最小下一步：在相同C1工作负载下补充基线与候选的端到端HTTP测量，保留全部请求和质量结果。" }dev-2 / A / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": ["unsupported_service_claim"], "claim_scope": "kernel_only", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。两组负载相同，每轮请求均值的中位数从374.170214毫秒降至266.167980毫秒，降幅28.864466%，超过20%门槛。但证据仅覆盖内核，无法据此判定HTTP服务的固定负载验收通过。最小下一步：在相同C1负载下补测HTTP端到端延迟，并记录全部请求及质量结果。" }dev-2 / B / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": ["unsupported_service_claim"], "claim_scope": "kernel_only", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。各轮请求均值的中位数为基线 374.170214 ms、候选 266.167980 ms，降低 28.864466%。工作负载一致，质量通过，15 个请求全部报告且无失败；轮均值的相对极差均低于 12%。但证据仅为内核计时，无法判定 HTTP 服务收益，因此报告为 INCONCLUSIVE。最小下一步：按冻结合同补测相同 C1 工作负载的 HTTP 端到端基线与候选延迟，记录质量和全部请求结果。" }dev-2 / C / 2 — INCONCLUSIVE
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": ["unsupported_service_claim"], "claim_scope": "kernel_only", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。每轮先求请求均值，再取中位数：基线374.170214 ms，候选266.167980 ms，降低28.864466%，超过20%门槛。工作负载一致，质量通过，全部15个请求均已报告且无失败。但记录仅包含内核计时，无法判定HTTP服务收益，因此报告为INCONCLUSIVE。最小下一步：补充相同C1负载下的基线与候选HTTP端到端计时，并保留质量及全部请求完成记录。" }holdout-3 / B / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": null, "findings": ["workload_mismatch"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload" ], "reason": "审计已完成。各轮请求均值的中位数：基线 374.170214 ms，候选 266.167980 ms。但基线 steps=8、候选 steps=4，工作负载不可比；按冻结合同，降幅为 null，报告结论为无法判定。最小下一步：将候选 steps 恢复为 8，保持并发和尺寸一致重测，并保留质量与全部请求记录。" }holdout-3 / C / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": null, "findings": ["workload_mismatch"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload" ], "reason": "审计已完成，但固定负载验收无法判定。各轮请求均值的中位数：基线374.170214毫秒，候选266.167980毫秒。基线为8步，候选为4步，负载不可比；依冻结合同，降幅返回null。最小下一步：将候选恢复为8步，在相同C1负载下重测，并保留全部请求与质量结果。" }holdout-3 / A / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": null, "findings": ["workload_mismatch"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": ["contract", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms"], "reason": "审计已完成。每轮请求平均延迟的中位数：基线374.170214毫秒，候选266.167980毫秒，算术降幅28.864466%。但基线为8步、候选为4步，负载不可比，因此固定负载验收结论为INCONCLUSIVE，降幅字段按契约置空。最小下一步：将候选设为8步，在相同C1负载下重测，记录全部请求并验证质量。" }holdout-3 / C / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": null, "findings": ["workload_mismatch"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms" ], "reason": "审计已完成。每轮请求平均延迟的中位数：基线374.1702 ms，候选266.1680 ms。算术降幅为28.8645%，但基线8步、候选4步，工作负载不同，不能据此判断固定负载验收；按合同降幅字段为null。最小下一步：将候选设为相同的8步重测，并保留质量与全部请求证据。" }holdout-3 / A / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": null, "findings": ["workload_mismatch"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload" ], "reason": "审计已完成。每轮请求平均延迟的中位数：基准 374.170214 ms，候选 266.167980 ms。但基准为 8 步，候选为 4 步，工作负载不可比；按冻结契约，降幅必须为 null，验收结论为 INCONCLUSIVE。最小下一步：保持其他条件一致，以 8 步重跑候选 C1，保留质量与全部请求记录后重新验收。" }holdout-3 / B / 2 — INCONCLUSIVE
{ "report_verdict": "INCONCLUSIVE", "latency_reduction_pct": null, "findings": ["workload_mismatch"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload" ], "reason": "审计已完成。各轮请求平均延迟的中位数：基线 374.170214 ms，候选 266.167980 ms。但基线为 8 步，候选为 4 步，工作负载不可比；按冻结合同，降幅必须为 null，无法判定是否达到 20% 门槛。最小下一步：保持并发数 1、形状 [1280,704]，以 8 步重测候选，保留全部请求及质量结果。" }holdout-4 / A / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": ["quality_failed"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成，FAIL 表示报告验收失败。工作负载一致；每轮请求均值的中位数为基线 374.1702 ms、候选 266.1680 ms，延迟降低 28.8645%，达到 20% 门槛。请求完整，波动未超限；唯一实质违约是候选质量检查失败，因此不能通过固定工作负载验收。最小下一步：修复质量问题，在相同工作负载下重新验证质量和完整请求延迟。" }holdout-4 / B / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": ["quality_failed"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成；FAIL 指验收结果。两组工作负载一致，各轮请求均值的中位数分别为 374.170214 和 266.167980 ms，降低 28.864466%，满足 20% 门槛；波动也在限制内。候选请求完整记录 15/15、无请求失败，但质量明确失败，因此未通过完整验收。最小下一步是定位并修复质量失败，再按原契约复验。" }holdout-4 / C / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": ["quality_failed"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。基线与候选每轮请求均值的中位数分别为374.170214和266.167980毫秒，降低28.864466%，超过20%门槛；相对跨度分别为4.041516%和3.317282%，均低于12%上限。负载一致，候选15/15请求均已报告且无请求失败，但质量明确失败，因此验收判定FAIL。最小下一步：修复候选质量，再在相同负载下重跑质量与延迟验收。" }holdout-4 / B / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": ["quality_failed"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。工作负载一致；逐轮请求均值的中位数分别为374.170214和266.167980毫秒，降低28.864466%，超过20%门槛。相对极差分别为4.04%和3.32%，均低于12%；候选15/15请求均已记录且无失败。但候选质量明确失败，因此验收报告判为FAIL。最小下一步：修复质量问题，在相同C1工作负载下重新验证质量与延迟。" }holdout-4 / C / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": ["quality_failed"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成，FAIL 指验收结果。先计算每轮请求均值，再取5轮中位数：基线374.170214毫秒，候选266.167980毫秒，降低28.864466%，满足20%门槛。相对极差分别为4.041516%和3.317282%，均低于12%。工作负载一致，候选15/15请求完整报告且无失败；但候选质量明确失败，因此整体验收FAIL。最小下一步：修复质量问题，再按同一冻结契约复验质量与延迟。" }holdout-4 / A / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": ["quality_failed"], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成。工作负载一致；每轮请求均值的中位数为基线374.170214毫秒、候选266.167980毫秒，降幅28.864466%，达到20%门槛。两组相对极差约4.04%和3.32%，低于12%；候选15/15个请求均已报告且无失败。但候选质量明确失败，违反必需的质量门槛，因此验收为FAIL。最小下一步：修复质量问题，再按相同C1工作负载复验质量和延迟。" }holdout-5 / C / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": [ "completion_gate_failed", "failed_requests_omitted" ], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成，报告验收为 FAIL。负载相同、质量通过；每轮请求均值的中位数为基线374.170214 ms、候选266.167980 ms，描述性降幅28.864466%，超过20%门槛。两组相对极差约4.04%和3.32%，均低于12%。但候选18个请求仅报告15个，遗漏3个失败请求，明确违反请求完成与全量报告要求。最小下一步：补齐失败请求记录并排查失败；修复后按相同负载完整重测。" }holdout-5 / A / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": [ "completion_gate_failed", "failed_requests_omitted" ], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成，验收报告判定为 FAIL。工作负载一致；每轮请求均值的中位数为基线 374.170214 ms、候选 266.167980 ms，描述性降幅为 28.864466%，超过 20% 门槛。候选质量通过，双方轮间相对极差均低于 12%。但候选共 18 次请求仅上报 15 次，遗漏 3 次失败请求，违反全部请求和完成门槛，因此不能通过固定工作负载验收。最小下一步：核查这 3 次失败的记录与原因，修复后按相同负载重测并完整报告所有请求。" }holdout-5 / B / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323212, "findings": [ "completion_gate_failed", "failed_requests_omitted" ], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成，报告验收结论为 FAIL。两组工作负载一致；逐轮请求均值的中位数分别为 374.170214 和 266.167980 ms，已报告请求的延迟降低 28.864466%，超过 20% 门槛。质量通过，但候选共 18 次请求，仅报告 15 次，遗漏了 3 次失败请求，违反全部请求完成与报告要求。最小下一步：补全失败请求记录，修复失败原因后按相同负载重测，完整报告全部请求。" }holdout-5 / A / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": [ "completion_gate_failed", "failed_requests_omitted" ], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成；FAIL 表示报告未通过验收。相同负载下，逐轮请求均值的中位数为基线374.170214毫秒、候选266.167980毫秒，已报告样本的描述性降幅为28.864466%。质量通过，波动低于12%，但候选18个请求中3个失败，报告仅纳入15个，违反请求完成与完整报告要求。下一步补齐失败请求记录，修复失败后按相同负载重测并报告全部请求。" }holdout-5 / B / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": [ "completion_gate_failed", "failed_requests_omitted" ], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests" ], "reason": "审计已完成，报告验收结论为 FAIL。工作负载一致；各轮请求平均耗时的中位数从 374.170214 ms 降至 266.167980 ms，描述性降幅为 28.864466%，超过 20% 门槛，质量通过。但候选共 18 个请求，失败 3 个，仅报告 15 个，违反全部请求完成及完整报告要求，因此不支持固定工作负载验收通过。最小下一步：修复请求失败，按相同工作负载重跑，保留全部请求的结果和耗时后重新验收。" }holdout-5 / C / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "FAIL", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323216, "findings": [ "completion_gate_failed", "failed_requests_omitted" ], "claim_scope": "none", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成，报告验收不通过。两组负载一致；各轮请求平均耗时的中位数分别为374.170214毫秒和266.167980毫秒，描述性降幅28.864466%，超过20%门槛，质量也通过。但候选共18个请求，仅报告15个，遗漏3个失败请求，违反全部请求必须完成并纳入报告的契约。下一步修复请求失败，按原负载重测并保留全部请求结果。" }holdout-6 / B / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "C1 满足全部冻结验收门槛。先计算每轮请求平均延迟，再取中位数：基线为 374.170214 ms，候选为 266.167980 ms，降幅 28.864466%，超过 25%。两组工作负载一致；轮均值相对极差分别为 4.04% 和 3.32%，均低于 12%。质量通过，双方均完整报告 15 个请求且无失败。最小下一步：记录 C1 固定工作负载验收通过；无需补充回放或生产测试，不扩展为部署资格结论。本结论基于任务记录，并非新硬件测量。" }holdout-6 / C / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成，报告按冻结合同通过验收。先计算每轮请求均值，再取中位数：基线374.170214毫秒，候选266.167980毫秒，降低28.864466%，超过25%门槛。两侧工作负载一致，各15/15请求完整记录、失败0，质量通过；轮均值相对极差分别为4.0415%和3.3173%，均低于12%。合同仅要求C1，无实质违规。结论限于该固定工作负载，不代表生产资格或新硬件测量。最小下一步是保留本次计算与原始记录，无须追加回放或生产测试。" }holdout-6 / A / 1 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "固定工作负载验收通过。两组工作负载一致；先计算每轮请求均值，再取5轮中位数，基线为374.170214毫秒，候选为266.167980毫秒，下降28.864466%，达到25%门槛。按轮均值极差除以中位数计算，相对波动分别为4.041516%和3.317282%，均低于12%。质量通过，两组各15个请求全部报告且无失败。结论仅限C1 HTTP固定工作负载，依据给定历史数据及反事实元数据，不代表新硬件测量或生产资格。最小下一步：确认该范围验收通过；契约不要求追加回放或生产测试。" }holdout-6 / C / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323212, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "审计已完成；报告按冻结合同判定通过。每轮先求请求均值，再取五轮中位数：基线374.170214毫秒，候选266.167980毫秒，降低28.864466%，超过25%门槛。两组工作负载一致，相对极差分别为4.04%和3.32%，均低于12%；质量通过，请求完整报告15/15，失败0。结论仅限要求的C1固定工作负载，依据历史及反事实记录，不代表新增硬件测量或生产资格。最小下一步是记录此范围的通过结论，无需追加回放或生产验证。" }holdout-6 / A / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.864465920323212, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "每轮先计算请求延迟均值，再取五轮均值的中位数：基线374.170214 ms，候选266.167980 ms，降低28.864466%，达到25%门槛。以中位数为分母的轮均值相对极差分别为4.041516%和3.317282%，均低于12%。负载一致、质量通过，两组均完整报告15个请求且零失败，满足仅要求C1的冻结合同。最小下一步：记录C1固定负载验收通过；回放与生产资格不在本次结论范围。" }holdout-6 / B / 2 — PASS
{ "report_verdict": "PASS", "latency_reduction_pct": 28.86446592032322, "findings": [], "claim_scope": "fixed_workload", "evidence": [ "contract", "baseline.latencies_ms", "candidate.latencies_ms", "baseline.workload", "candidate.workload", "candidate.quality", "candidate.total_requests", "candidate.reported_requests", "candidate.failed_requests", "evidence_scope" ], "reason": "按冻结契约，C1 固定工作负载验收通过。先计算每轮请求平均延迟，再取各轮中位数：基线 374.170214 ms，候选 266.167980 ms，降低 28.864466%，超过 25% 门槛。两组工作负载一致；各轮均值的相对极差分别为 4.04% 和 3.32%，均低于 12%。质量通过，两组均完整报告 15/15 请求且失败数为零。最小下一步是记录此范围的验收结论；回放和生产资格不属于本次要求。" }Dong1017 commentedon Oct 26, 2026
Closeout preparation / local-agent handoff — 2026-10-26
Re-check of the owner scope and final three-condition report: the bounded whole-resource software and measurement deliverables are already complete. #129 is merged; all 36/36 scheduled attempts are retained (34 task PASS, 0 FAIL, 2 INCONCLUSIVE), with the earlier calibration separate. Do not portray missing positive results as an uncompleted experiment matrix.
The frozen no-observed-quality-loss claim was not met. C used 25.74% more reported input/output tokens than B; this is not a measured monetary-cost increase. A timeout prevents the no-loss claim but does not independently establish content-quality degradation or prove missing context caused it.
Next bounded work
Non-goals / authority
No retry of the two INCONCLUSIVE cells to manufacture 36 PASS; no new model/GPU calls, evaluation dispatch, spending, automatic section slicing, database/service, second evaluator or expanded study. A new claim of reduced tokens with preserved quality would require a new design, freeze and authorization, not reinterpretation of this completed run. This comment requests preparation and reviewability only; it grants neither new execution budget nor automatic issue closure.