evandro/ForgeLM
1
0 Fork 0
Code Issues 1 Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

feat: add cli backend invocation specs

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Evandro Fonseca Junior committed 2026-03-26 19:41:38 -03:00
1 parent 3969f12f26
commit f538fc60bb
4 files changed
+108 -8
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

No files matched your search

autoresearch.md
+9
View File
@@ -54,3 +54,12 @@ so later experiments can add real execution behavior without redesigning the UX
- Baseline run 21 (`3d1460b`) scored `76.667%`: the CLI already preserves parser, summary, and plan semantics, but `execution_contract()` still collapses the new workflows to `SummaryOnly { command: "unplanned" }` instead of concrete HTTP/local contracts.
- Run 22 (`38acb52`) mapped the highest-value `CommandPlan` variants into concrete `ExecutionContract` values for `/health`, `/v1/chat/completions`, local model scan/load, local auth/config mutation, and local log reads, raising segment 8 from `76.667%` to `100.0%` (30/30 passing).
- Segment 9 raises the bar from contract shape to execution stubs, checking whether the same high-value workflows can already describe concrete HTTP method/path/body details or named local actions that a future real executor can run directly.
- Baseline run 23 (`7030290`) scored `83.333%`: parser, summaries, plans, and execution contracts still pass, but `execution_stub()` is only a placeholder and returns `SummaryOnly { command: "unimplemented" }` instead of concrete HTTP/local stubs for the highest-value workflows.
- Run 24 (`50d435a`) mapped the highest-value `ExecutionContract` variants into concrete `ExecutionStub` values for `GET /health`, `POST /v1/chat/completions`, local model scan/load, local auth config, and local log tail actions, raising segment 9 from `83.333%` to `100.0%` (36/36 passing).
- Segment 10 raises the bar from execution stubs to dry-run previews, checking whether the same high-value workflows can expand into full previewable HTTP URLs or local-effect descriptions that are ready to show in a future `--dry-run` UX.
- Baseline run 25 (`cd480c4`) scored `85.714%`: parser, summaries, plans, contracts, and stubs still pass, but `execution_preview()` remained a placeholder and returned `SummaryOnly { command: "preview-unimplemented" }` instead of final dry-run previews.
- Run 26 (`c8ef7cf`) mapped the highest-value execution stubs into concrete `ExecutionPreview` values with full health/chat URLs and readable local-effect descriptions, raising segment 10 from `85.714%` to `100.0%` (42/42 passing).
- Segment 11 raises the bar from preview objects to final `--dry-run` output, checking whether the CLI can now render those previews as actual text/json UX for the same high-value workflows.
- Baseline run 27 (`7738acf`) scored `87.5%`: the CLI already had parser/summary/plan/contract/stub/preview layers, but `render_execution_preview()` still collapsed everything to `DRY RUN {summary}` instead of final text/json dry-run output.
- Run 28 (`99e5041`) rendered the highest-value `ExecutionPreview` values into final user-facing text/json dry-run output, raising segment 11 from `87.5%` to `100.0%` (48/48 passing).
- Segment 12 raises the bar from dry-run UX to the first real backend-call specifications for commands that can already work today, specifically `status`, `models list`, and `bench throughput`.