AGENTS.md file, shared skill, model, reasoning setting, or tool policy is safe
to keep. Your coding agent proposes and applies changes; Stet evaluates matched
work and returns a scoped decision.
Find your next answer
Is my AGENTS.md change helping?
Compare current and proposed instructions on the same retained tasks.
Improve my AGENTS.md
Iterate one instruction lever at a time with a bounded stop rule.
Is this skill helping?
Test a skill against an appropriate absent or committed baseline.
Which model or reasoning effort should I use?
Compare configurations on the same repository task slice.
The loop
Accepted repository work becomes replayable tasks. Stet runs a baseline and a candidate against the same task slice, evaluates their patches with tests and graders, and writes a Trial Result with one scoped recommendation.Example Trial Result
This is a historical April 2026 model comparison across 28 paired Zod tasks, with Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7 both using high reasoning. It is a scoped example, not a current or universal model ranking.| Observed measure | Opus 4.6 | Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Test pass rate | 42.9% | 42.9% |
| Equivalence rate | 32.1% | 46.4% |
| Observed cost per task | $19.96 | $8.11 |
| Mean agent duration | 7m 58s | 3m 12s |
PROMOTE candidate Opus 4.7, high confidence, for this recorded
harness and task corpus.
- Historical April 2026 result, scoped to this 28-task Zod corpus and recorded harness.
- The legacy report predates Stet’s current calibration and claim-readiness fields.
- The displayed metric values are observations, not generalized or uncertainty-calibrated improvement claims.
- The receipt also used declared grader evidence not reproduced here.
Machine-readable receipt
Machine-readable receipt