report-performance-analysis

name

report-performance-analysis

description

Use this skill whenever the user asks whether a Roboclaws live-agent report run is faster, wants to compare Agent SDK/Codex/Claude cleanup reports, asks about model-call work, residual latency, speedup validity, or report performance under provider/network variance. The skill extracts sanitized JSON metrics first and answers only from generated metric/comparison artifacts, not from report.html scraping or raw prompts.

Report Performance Analysis

Use this skill to analyze Roboclaws live-agent report performance honestly under unstable provider and network conditions.

Workflow

1. Read references/metric-contract.md.
2. Identify the run directory or comparison manifest.
3. Run fixed scripts before answering:
   • One run: scripts/extract_live_report_metrics.py <run_dir>
   • Two runs or manifest: scripts/compare_live_report_metrics.py ...
   • Calibration data: scripts/calibrate_model_latency.py ...
4. Answer from generated JSON packets. Do not scrape report.html, raw prompt text, model text, full tool payloads, private evaluator truth, or compact continuation state.

Interpretation Rules

• Lead with quality and effect before wall time.
• Treat single-run output as diagnostic unless an explicit baseline or manifest is supplied.
• Missing token, duration, image, or calibration fields are unavailable, not zero.
• A faster candidate is not a speed win when quality regressed unless the comparison packet records an explicit waiver.
• Call out apples-to-oranges baselines, missing telemetry, uncalibrated normalized model time, and high model/SDK residual latency.

Common Commands

Extract one run:

.venv/bin/python skills/report-performance-analysis/scripts/extract_live_report_metrics.py \
  output/path/to/seed-7 \
  --output output/report-performance-analysis/metrics.json \
  --write-model-call-metrics

Compare two runs:

.venv/bin/python skills/report-performance-analysis/scripts/compare_live_report_metrics.py \
  --baseline-run-dir output/baseline/seed-7 \
  --candidate-run-dir output/candidate/seed-7 \
  --output output/report-performance-analysis/comparison.json

Compare with explicit normalized timing:

.venv/bin/python skills/report-performance-analysis/scripts/calibrate_model_latency.py \
  --output output/report-performance-analysis/calibration.json \
  output/baseline/seed-7/model_call_metrics.jsonl \
  output/candidate/seed-7/model_call_metrics.jsonl

.venv/bin/python skills/report-performance-analysis/scripts/compare_live_report_metrics.py \
  --baseline-run-dir output/baseline/seed-7 \
  --candidate-run-dir output/candidate/seed-7 \
  --calibration output/report-performance-analysis/calibration.json \
  --output output/report-performance-analysis/normalized-comparison.json

Compare a manifest:

.venv/bin/python skills/report-performance-analysis/scripts/compare_live_report_metrics.py \
  --manifest skills/report-performance-analysis/templates/comparison-manifest.json \
  --output output/report-performance-analysis/comparison.json

Answer Shape

Use a compact answer:

Verdict: <accepted speed win | diagnostic only | rejected | blocked>
Quality: <same/better/regressed and why>
Work: <model calls, tool calls, uncached/output/reasoning tokens>
Timing: <wall time, model API time, estimated model work availability, residual>
Limitations: <missing telemetry/calibration/apples-to-oranges/live gate>
Evidence: <metric JSON path or comparison JSON path>