Skip to content

Forward programme: per-specialist model/effort sweep (agentic specialists) #64

Description

@Jodre11

Context

Thread 3 of the code-review-suite forward programme (effectiveness, agreed 2026-06-17).

Goal

Find the optimum (model, effort) for each agentic/judgement specialist independently. Unlike the five static specialists (all haiku/low — they wrap deterministic tools), the agentic specialists do open-ended reasoning and may each land at a different answer.

In scope (7): correctness, security, style, reuse, alignment, archaeology, test-quality.
Apparatus: the existing per-agent A/B harness + corpus fixtures.

Hypotheses to test (empirical, not assumed)

  • Fable for security — likely best for adversarial reasoning, BUT the read-only guardrails wrapped around specialists might hold it back. Test, don't assume. (Gated on Fable availability; the rest of the sweep is testable now.)
  • Haiku for alignment/archaeology — possibly simpler judgement tasks that don't need frontier reasoning.
  • Sonnet as baseline — all agentic specialists currently run sonnet/default. Is that right, or over/under-specified for some?

Why this ordering

After thread 2 (phase-efficacy): if cross-review discards most of a specialist's output, optimising that specialist's model is lower-leverage than fixing pipeline structure.

Status

Not started. Depends on thread 2 findings + the A/B harness.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    enhancementNew feature or request

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions