eval: prove one-turn inbox delivery - #74
Draft
schickling wants to merge 11 commits into
Draft
Conversation
This was referenced Aug 11, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Treatment and driver boundary
The st2 binary is the only A/B variable.
1d06c4b263a7c5a2a6b8eec1f2e8c4fbea5e2edc06997b2c63ddf58678c7a4d024de62d957faf6c2bdc56766c15501e7946c1338c1a0f90dd4814ec3ce8067219530d7bd8723e1916795c8539ca308fc49b439a3b6495d2bcd2ad4a5ede4cfe02dd53be2f2c67d81Codex uses structured
argvwithdeliver "app-server"; Claude uses the maintained SessionStart hook. Both exact heads consume the same canonical cell, keeping the acceptance surface on the Agent Spec/driver-facing declaration boundary ahead of st2 #162.The cell invents no settle, claim, lease, cursor, provider opt-in, or eval-only delivery switch. It covers a two-message cold backlog for both providers plus a typed three-message Codex burst and one post-batch arrival.
Real-provider A/B
Tracked receipt:
evidence/inbox-one-turn-provider-ab-runs-20260811.jsonThe baseline was body-blind: Claude explicitly discovered bodies, while Codex archived all six messages but replied with subject-derived summaries instead of the hidden exact tokens. The candidate replied on and archived every exact body, including the bounded burst and post-batch arrival.
The original provider executions completed, but the judge launcher used a cell-relative path and exited 127. The receipt records this rather than calling the invocation green. Both preserved catalogs were deterministically regraded with corrected graders at
3de9f7e2cffbe4d24da95d4422ed5f687c4b30f9: baseline returns the semantic FAIL and candidate returns PASS. Claude API-call count and total serialized prompt bytes were not persisted and remain null.Free verification
At exact evals head
0e6b64ebdc652687926d43f4a41a955831ddd846:bin/check-corpus.sh: no verdict at its first provenance gate because the corpus expects published runner0fed14b; all subsequent free gates were run directly with the exact candidate binaryRelated to #57. Companion proof for compoundingtech/st2#238 and draft st2 PR #239.