ENGLISH OVERVIEW · EVALUATION PROTOCOL

Evaluating Tool Models: Success, Reliability, and Cost

Budding

Structured thesis with preliminary math or code; actively developing.

ℹDigital Garden

🌿 What is a Digital Garden?

Rooted in Andy Matuschak & Maggie Appleton's evergreen note taxonomy: articles are not ephemeral chronologies, but living organisms tended over time:

  • 🌱 Seedling: Raw inspiration, reading logs, open questions
  • 🌿 Budding: Structured thesis, early proofs, actively revised
  • 🌳 Evergreen: Closed logic, enduring, foundational reference
  • 🔬 Speculative: Empirical hypotheses coupled with lab instruments
Explore full Digital Garden →

Scope note. Probabilities, tables, and cost calculations are constructed. No tool model or training intervention was evaluated.

Define the system and success contract#

Fix task snapshots, tools, budgets, retries, decoding, and scoring before comparing results. Parsers, format repair, memory, and selectors belong to the system under evaluation. A deterministic inventory baseline can expose fixture problems without claiming to replace general language capability.

Success must include evidence and applicable constraints. Reporting insufficient stock can correctly complete a query. Reporting an unresolved timeout is distinct from obtaining an inventory answer. τ-bench v1 combines outcome and required-output checks while explicitly acknowledging that these do not capture every process-policy violation.

Distinguish coverage from reliability#

For a known per-task independent success probability p=0.8, at least one success in three attempts has probability 0.992; all three succeeding has probability 0.512. The former is pass@k, while τ-bench calls the latter pass^k. Coverage also requires a practical selector to deliver a successful result.

Given n observed trials with c successes and n≥k, subset estimators are one minus C(n−c,k)/C(n,k) for pass@k and C(c,k)/C(n,k) for pass^k. With n=5,c=4,k=3, they are 1 and 0.4. These differ from treating observed c/n as known p. A finite estimate of 1 is not a guarantee.

Compute per task before averaging. Tasks with true success probabilities 1 and 0 have mean three-run reliability 0.5, not the cube of their mean success rate. Shared memory, persistent faults, and changing state can violate independent-trial assumptions.

Count failures in cost accounting#

A constructed four-task batch has calls (1,2,5,4), durations (2,4,20,12), and only the first two tasks succeed. All-task averages are 3 calls and 9.5 seconds; success-only averages are 1.5 calls and 3 seconds. Total calls divided by successes is 6, a batch amortization measure rather than mean successful-trajectory cost.

Report tokens, repair, scoring, retries, elapsed time, and timeout rates with clear units. Separate attempted violations from operations blocked by the executor. A final answer can falsely claim a reservation even when the tool cannot create one.

Preserve paired outcomes and independence#

A constructed paired table has 60 both-success, 15 repairs, 5 regressions, and 20 both-failure tasks. Success rises from 65% to 75%, but regressions remain visible. Use task-family grouping when assessing uncertainty instead of treating repeated runs as unrelated tasks.

Keep development and test decisions separate. Document simulated-user limitations and exact system scope. The Chinese article closes this volume with a reporting protocol and introduces the final volume on evaluation and engineering reproducibility.

Article concept network

Explore sections and explicit terms from the text. Dashed lines connect repeated concepts, not causal claims.

13 / 13 nodes · marked terms and named concepts from the text

Evaluating Tool Models: Success, Reliability, and Cost

Evaluating Tool Models: Success, Reliability, and Cost

Read in context ↗
🌐

Local Knowledge Neighborhood

Evaluating Tool Models: Success, Reliability, and Cost Current Focus

搜索

正在载入索引…