Files
codegraph/docs/benchmarks/explore-sufficiency.md
T
Colby McHenry 382791f11e docs: one entry point for the three feedback metrics, and how to run them (CG-11)
Three per-metric docs told a maintainer what each number means; none said
which one answers which question, which harness produces it, or how to read
the arm table. agent-eval-feedback-metrics.md is that page — the metric →
question map, when to reach for ab-new-vs-baseline.sh (isolates a change,
both arms codegraph-on) versus run-all.sh (with vs without, a different
question) versus bench-readme.sh, the worked CG-22 express table where all
three read together, and the bucket → fix mapping. Not a fourth restatement:
the derivations stay where they are and each doc now points here.

The caveats that change how the summary table is read are carried over rather
than dropped — allocation efficiency is relative (attribution is by citation,
so same-question builds only, and never "codegraph wastes N%"), occupancy
shares are Claude Code / 200k and do not transfer between hosts while the arm
ratio does, sufficient is not correct, small-n throughout. Plus the
contamination row, which means different things in the two harnesses and is
the first thing to look at in both.

Also records that the CG-8 7-repo bucket block no longer re-derives:
bench-readme.sh overwrites /tmp/ab-readme, so the swept logs are gone. The
current logs give a different distribution over the same 62 calls, and the
CG-8-era and current classifiers agree exactly on them — so nothing moved
under the metric, the corpus did. CG-13 re-establishes the baseline.
2026-08-05 00:59:58 -05:00

181 lines
9.0 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# Explore sufficiency
> One of three feedback metrics the agent-eval harness reports on every run.
> [`agent-eval-feedback-metrics.md`](agent-eval-feedback-metrics.md) is the entry
> point: which metric answers which question, which harness to run, and how to
> read the arm-comparison table.
**What it measures:** whether a `codegraph_explore` response was *enough* — read
off what the agent did next, which the harness was throwing away.
The agent tells us on every call. It reads a file, or it explores again, or it
answers. That next action is free ground truth, and it splits into buckets that
each point at a different fix:
| Next action | Bucket | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| another codegraph call | `explore again` | insufficient — the response did not answer |
| `Read` of a file we **returned** | `Read a file we returned` | **allocation**: right file, wrong bytes |
| `Read` of a file we did **not** return | `Read a file we did not return` | **recall**: the file never surfaced |
| `Grep` / `Glob` | `Grep/Glob` | recall, weaker signal — still hunting |
| `Edit`, a build, the final answer | `moved on / answered` | sufficient |
Harness-only. Nothing is emitted from the product and nothing leaves the machine
(decided 2026-08-03); it is parsed out of transcripts we already write.
---
## Running it
Every run prints it — `run-all.sh` and anything else that calls `parse-run.mjs`:
```bash
scripts/agent-eval/run-all.sh /tmp/codegraph-corpus/express \
"How does res.send decide the Content-Type and ETag?"
# Or over a log you already have:
node scripts/agent-eval/parse-run.mjs /tmp/agent-eval/run-headless-with.jsonl
```
```
Explore sufficiency — what the agent did NEXT (2 answered calls):
1 50% explore again insufficient: did not answer
1 50% Read a file we returned allocation: right file, wrong bytes
0 0% Read a file we did not return recall: file never surfaced
0 0% Grep/Glob recall (weak): still hunting for the file
0 0% moved on / answered sufficient
1. "res.send Content-Type ETag generation" [3 files] → codegraph_explore
2. "response.js res.send function body" [3 files] → Read response.js
```
Interactive runs get the same block from `parse-session.mjs <project-dir>`.
The per-call lines matter as much as the counts: they name the query that fell
short and the file the agent went and read instead, which is usually enough to
reproduce the miss with `probe-explore.mjs`.
---
## The rules that keep it honest
**Only a later message counts as a reaction.** A `Read` fired in the *same*
assistant message as the explore was issued before the response existed, so it
is not a verdict on it. Those are stepped over and counted separately as
`concurrent`.
**Bookkeeping is stepped over.** `ToolSearch` (pulling a deferred tool schema)
and `TodoWrite` say nothing about the response; the call behind them is the
verdict.
**Subagents are a separate thread.** Claude Code interleaves a subagent's tool
calls into the same stream-json output, tagged `parent_tool_use_id` — verified
on a real excalidraw run where a delegated search's greps landed between the
parent's own calls. Reactions are matched within one thread, or a subagent's
first grep gets scored as the parent's verdict on an explore it never saw. In
interactive sessions the subagent lives in its own file instead; each
`agent-*.meta.json` carries the `toolUseId` of the Task that spawned it, and
`parse-session.mjs` stitches the threads back together with it.
**A delegation is judged by what the subagent did first.** `Agent`/`Task`
first substantive call, shown as `Agent → Bash search`. Scoring the delegation
itself as "moved on" is the one error a tuning metric must not make: on the
excalidraw run below it reported 33% sufficient while the subagent was off
grepping for the file. A delegation that never runs a tool stays "moved on".
**Shell file access counts.** Both arms have Bash, and agents reach for
`sed -n '100,200p' lib/x.js` as readily as for `Read`; `grep`/`rg`/`find`/`ls`
count as search. Counting only the `Read` and `Grep` tools would score those
explores as sufficient. A heredoc or a redirect is writing, not reading.
**Returned means we shipped the source.** A file is "returned" if the response
carried its per-file section (the ``**` `` marker). A file the response only
*named* — a flow step, a blast-radius entry — is still a recall miss, flagged
`(named, not returned)`, because pointing without delivering is its own failure.
**A file an earlier explore shipped still counts as returned.** Re-reading it is
an allocation miss wherever we shipped it; filing that as recall would aim the
fix at the wrong end of the pipeline. The line says which
(`Read utils.js (returned by an earlier explore)`).
**Errored calls are counted, not bucketed.** An explore that came back
`isError` or never returned has no response to judge; it is reported separately.
---
## Validation
Hand-checked against real transcripts, then swept over every A/B log on this
machine: 76 single-question runs (176 calls) plus the 14 multi-turn with-arm
sessions of the 7-repo README corpus (62 calls), 0 crashes. That corpus
exercises every bucket:
```
explore again 29 (47%) · Read a file we returned 7 (11%) ·
Read a file we did not return 1 (2%) · Grep/Glob 14 (23%) · moved on 11 (18%)
```
Read it as a baseline, not a verdict: these are three-turn sessions on hard
flow questions, and "explored again" includes the legitimate second call on a
repo whose budget is 23 calls.
**That block is a snapshot, and it no longer re-derives.** `bench-readme.sh`
overwrites `/tmp/ab-readme` on every campaign, so the logs sitting there are not
the ones swept above. Pooling the 14 with-arm sessions on disk as of 2026-08-05
gives `explore again 47 (76%) · Read a file we returned 1 (2%) · Read a file we
did not return 1 (2%) · Grep/Glob 0 (0%) · moved on 13 (21%)` over the same 62
calls — checked against both the CG-8-era classifier and the current one, which
agree exactly, so the classifier did not move under it. **CG-13 re-establishes
the 7-repo baseline from a single campaign with all three metrics wired**; treat
that as the number to compare against, and archive a campaign's logs elsewhere
if you want a distribution to stay reproducible.
**`cg22/ab-express/run-baseline-1` — the allocation bucket, by hand.** Sequence:
explore *"res.send Content-Type ETag generation"* → explore *"response.js
res.send function body"* → `Read /…/t-base/lib/response.js`. The second explore
returned `lib/response.js`, and the agent read it anyway → `explore again`, then
`Read a file we returned`. That is the #1500 allocation bug (the 583-byte stub)
showing up as a bucket instead of as a hunch. The new-build arm of the same
question: one explore, `moved on / answered`, 100% sufficient.
**`cg15/ab-express/run-new-2` — the same verdict on a longer run.** Four
explores; the fourth returned `lib/utils.js` and the agent then read
`/…/t-new/lib/utils.js` at `offset: 195`. Right file, wrong window.
**`ab-readme/excalidraw/run2` — the recall bucket, by hand.** The third explore
returned `components/App.tsx` and `components/canvases/InteractiveCanvas.tsx`;
the agent's next action was `Read components/canvases/StaticCanvas.tsx` — the
sibling canvas, named in the response and not shipped. Bucketed
`Read a file we did not return (named, not returned)`. The fourth call in the
same session delegated, and the subagent's first move was a shell read of
`element/src/shape.ts`, which that explore *had* returned → allocation, shown as
`Agent → Bash Read shape.ts`.
**excalidraw `canvasNonce` — the recall bucket, end to end.** A fresh
`run-all.sh` arm on the documented data-flow frontier: three explores, the last
one delegating a subagent that immediately grepped for `sceneNonce` → 67%
`explore again`, 33% `Grep/Glob`, **0% sufficient**. That matches what
`CLAUDE.md` already records about this question (the residual reads and greps
are all nonce data-flow, deliberately uncovered) — the metric found it without
being told.
`node scripts/agent-eval/parse-run.mjs --selftest` covers the classifier over
synthetic transcripts with known answers: every bucket, the same-message rule,
the thread rule, delegation, shell reads and searches, and errored calls.
---
## What it does not say
- **Sufficient is not correct.** The agent moving on means the response was
enough to stop it, not that the answer was right. Answer quality is not
measured here.
- **A Read is a vote, not a proof.** An agent sometimes re-reads a file it
already has. The bucket is still the right signal — it read *because
something was missing* — but a single call is noisy; read the counts over a
pass, not one run.
- **Bucket 1 is ambiguous by construction.** "Explored again" means the response
did not answer; it does not say whether that was allocation or recall. The
follow-up explore's query usually does.
- **Small-n.** Runs make 15 explore calls, so one run's percentages are coarse.
Compare arms over a pass (`RUNS>=2`, and the 7-repo campaign), never n=1.