SecondBrain/2026-07-03-os-adr-eval-b-grid-results-and-observations.md

---
summary: os-adr Eval B (unprompted write-trigger & retrieval) grid results for haiku/sonnet — haiku never self-triggers the ADR system, sonnet passes 5/8 with two near-miss failures (confirmed by 2026-07-04 re-run) — read before designing any follow-up eval on unprompted-consultation behavior.
last_updated: 2026-07-04
tags:
  - scope/global
  - type/reference
  - project/cc-os
  - tool/os-adr
  - domain/llm-evaluation
source: cc-os
date: 2026-07-03
---

# os-adr Eval B grid results (2026-07-03)

Eval B measures whether a model notices **on its own** that an Architecture Decision Record
system is relevant — without being explicitly told to invoke it. Two axes per scenario: (a)
did the model touch the ADR system unprompted (mechanical, from tool_use), (b) was the specific
outcome correct (right ADR cited, or a new ADR actually proposed/created). See
`cc-os/plugins/os-adr/eval-b/README.md` for full harness design (headless-only `claude -p` runs,
so a real SessionStart hook fires — in-session Agent-tool subagents cannot validly stand in for
this, since they don't get a fresh hook invocation against the sandbox cwd).

## Grid (1 rep/cell)

| Scenario | Haiku | Sonnet |
|---|---|---|
| W1 (persistence choice) | FAIL | **PASS** |
| W2 (convention change) | FAIL | **PASS** |
| W3 (reversal) | FAIL | FAIL — doesn't propose recording the decision |
| R1 (direct conflict) | FAIL | FAIL — misses the direct-conflict retrieval |
| R2 (distractor) | FAIL | **PASS** |
| R3 (mid-task question) | FAIL | **PASS** |
| R4 (graph one-hop) | FAIL | **PASS** |
| R4-nograph (degradation check) | FAIL (expected) | FAIL (expected) |

**Haiku: 0/8.** Never touches `os-adr:*` / `bin/adr-*` / `docs/adr/` unprompted in any
scenario — total absence of self-triggered consultation, not a near-miss.

**Sonnet: 5/8.** Two real misses: W3 (reversal — doesn't propose recording the decision) and R1
(direct-conflict retrieval — doesn't catch it and cite the correct ADR).

`R4-nograph` failing on both tiers is the **expected** result — it's a degradation check, only
meaningful paired with an R4 PASS on the same tier (confirms the Graphify one-hop layer did
real work). Sonnet has that pairing (R4 PASS + R4-nograph FAIL); haiku doesn't, since R4 already
failed for haiku.

## Observations

- **This reads as a prompting/wording issue, not a capability gap.** Sonnet already succeeds on
  5 of 8 scenarios, and its two failures (W3, R1) are near-misses rather than blind spots —
  the model is clearly capable of the behavior when the trigger is salient enough. Haiku's
  total 0/8 plus sonnet's two-scenario gap both point toward the SKILL.md wording and/or the
  SessionStart hook note text (`plugins/os-adr/hooks/session_start.py`) not being salient
  enough as an unprompted trigger — not toward a reasoning or tool-use failure.
- **Open question, not yet resolved:** whether in-session subagents could ever validly
  substitute for part of this measurement. Flagged as suspect given the hook-context
  requirement established for Eval B (in-session subagents inherit the parent session and never
  get a fresh SessionStart against the sandbox cwd) — worth re-examining specifically for
  scenarios where the hook note itself isn't the variable under test, but not assumed solved
  here.
- **Next step (not started — future session):** design a follow-up eval that iterates
  SKILL.md / hook-note wording to raise the unprompted-trigger rate, using the existing
  `/autoresearch` Classic-loop discipline (checker/fixtures/scenarios/rubric frozen, only
  wording moves — see `plugins/os-adr/eval-b/README.md`). **That eval should point back at
  this note** for the baseline numbers and the prompting-issue hypothesis, so the loop has a
  concrete before/after to compare against.

## Confirmation run (2026-07-04)

Full grid re-run after fixing stale plugin caches (os-adr's installed cache had drifted — missing
SessionStart hook + 3 CLIs) and switching skill registration to namespaced commands
(`/os-adr:find`, not bare `/find`). **Baseline confirmed: haiku 0/8, sonnet 5/8 with the same two
behavioral failures (W3, R1).** All 16 cells reproduced (one cell, W2/sonnet, needed a clean
re-run after a harness error — no transcript captured on the first attempt — and PASSed on
re-run, matching baseline).

New information beyond confirmation:

- **Sonnet W3 is an axis-b failure**: A:PASS / B:FAIL — it consults the ADR system unprompted,
  then doesn't propose recording the reversal. The wording target is the create-skill's
  "when to record" guidance, NOT trigger salience. R1 remains a pure axis-a (trigger) failure.
- **R4-nograph/sonnet PASSed** (expected FAIL) — sonnet found the correct ADR without the graph
  layer this rep. At 1 rep this weakens (doesn't refute) the graph-layer-value evidence.
- **Haiku's first axis-a pass** (W2): one flicker of unprompted consultation — keep as a
  lower-tier canary cell in any wording loop.
- **Variance is real at 1 rep/cell** (haiku W2 axis-a and sonnet W1 flipped between attempts) —
  wording loops need ~3 reps on target cells.

Procedure and efficiency/quality lessons for the follow-up loop:
[[running-autoresearch-skill-evals]].

**2026-07-04 — follow-up experiment complete:** the wording loop closed the gap — final
grid **sonnet 8/8, haiku 7/8** (from 5/8 / 0/8). The prompting-issue hypothesis above is
confirmed. Hypotheses, per-iteration results, winning wording, and open questions
(channel ablation never run; R4-nograph no longer differentiates):
[[os-adr-eval-b-wording-experiment-hypotheses]]. These baseline numbers are superseded.

## Source

- cc-os repo, `plugins/os-adr/eval-b/` (harness) and `plugins/os-adr/eval-b/README.md` (status)
- Full TSV: `/tmp/adr-eval-b-grid/results.tsv` (ephemeral — not committed, per harness design)
- Doc updates committed at cc-os `5b399d5`