zby/commonplace/evaluate-scenarios
Claude Code and agent skill by zby/commonplace
- community
Checking that the SKILL.md file is still in the repository.
Measure framework overhead by decomposing scenarios into clean-context forks and reporting per-fork load plus aggregate cost.
Install
npx vskill@latest install zby/commonplace/evaluate-scenariosSKILL.md
EXECUTE NOW
Target: $ARGUMENTS
Parse immediately:
- empty → evaluate all scenarios in
tests/scenarios/ - a scenario name → evaluate only that scenario
compare→ evaluate all and compare against a previous run if one exists
This harness measures operational overhead: the framework instructions an agent must read on top of the task's own content. The unit is the fork, not the operation — every cp-skill-* runs context: fork, so each fork pays its overhead from a fresh context. See kb/theory/feasibility-is-the-heaviest-forks-net-load.md for the model.
1. Discover scenario files
Read each scenario. Each has a ## Forks section with one subsection per fork; each fork has a table of loads: load | kind | source | hops, where kind is overhead, content, or spared.
2. Config (override via $ARGUMENTS, e.g. notesize=3000 candidates=4 budget=50000 agents_per_fork=on)
| Knob | Default | Meaning | |
|---|---|---|---|
notesize | 2,000 B | average note/body read | |
candidates | 3 | content notes opened where a fork prospects bodies | |
spared_bodies | 3 | bodies an index or description-listing read lets a fork skip | |
index_size | 3,000 B | one curated index read or scoped description listing | |
validate_out | 500 B | bytes a commonplace-validate run returns into context | |
budget | 50,000 B | usable-window soft ceiling for the feasibility flag (overhead + content + room to reason) | |
agents_per_fork | off | if on, add AGENTS.md overhead to every fork, not only where the scenario lists it (the "is AGENTS.md re-injected?" assumption) |
3. Measure overhead bytes (per fork)
For each overhead row, read the file named in source and measure it:
Measure each distinct file once and reuse the number, but add it to every fork that lists it — do not amortize across forks. A commonplace-validate (or other tool) source contributes validate_out bytes and 1 hop, not a file measurement. An index given as a concrete path is measured with wc -c like any file; index_size applies only to a generic unnamed index or scoped listing the scenario does not path. (Complete dir-index.md listings no longer exist in the repo — ADR 025; a legacy scenario that lists one should be re-costed as a scoped rg listing.)
Common overhead sources: AGENTS.md, the target COLLECTION.md, the type-spec (kb/types/*.md), the invoked skill body (kb/instructions/cp-skill-*/SKILL.md), and curated tag indexes.
4. Estimate content and spared bytes (per fork)
contentrow:notesizeper body, times the count implied by the hop range (use the midpoint). A row marked "the insight"/"already in session" with hops 0 contributes its rough size if stated, elsenotesize.sparedrow: a negative credit,spared_bodies × notesizeminus theindex_sizethat replaced them (the index or listing read is already counted as overhead).
5. Count hops (per fork)
Sum the hops column per fork; a range (2-4) uses its midpoint. Track overhead-hops and content-hops separately so the cost signal can report overhead hops.
6. Compute the two signals (per scenario)
- Net load per fork = overhead bytes + content bytes − spared credit (bytes); net hops = overhead + content hops.
- Feasibility signal = the single heaviest fork by net bytes — report that fork, its net bytes and net hops, and flag it if net bytes exceed
budget. - Cost signal = overhead bytes summed across all forks (gross — the spared credit applies only to feasibility), and overhead hops summed across all forks.
7. Output
8. Verify plausibility
Sanity-check against the live files, not remembered typical sizes — artifact sizes drift as the system evolves, so a hand-maintained range goes stale. Whenever a size drives a verdict or looks surprising, re-run wc -c on the actual artifact (AGENTS.md, the COLLECTION.md, the type spec, the skill body) and use that number.
One structural anchor that scales rather than drifts: a scoped rg description listing costs roughly 150 B per matching note — it grows with the slice, not the collection.
START NOW. Read the scenarios, measure overhead per fork, emit the per-scenario fork tables and the feasibility + cost signals.
Security
- Security scanPassed, 100 of 100Pattern checks on the skill's files.
- Model reviewNot runA model review is scheduled for the next rescan.
Quality evaluation
- Task evaluationNot runNo evaluation yet. Run one in Skill Studio.
Source
- SKILL.md in the repositoryCheckingkb/instructions/evaluate-scenarios/SKILL.md
Popularity
- Repository stars
- 77
- Repository forks
- 10
- 7-day trend score
- 22
Stars and forks are for the whole GitHub repository, not this skill alone. Not refreshed yet.
Works with
Any agent vskill installs to: 56 targets in all. These 39 have a page on this site.
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- GitHub Copilot
- Windsurf
- Codex
- Gemini CLI
- Cline
- Amp
- Roo Code
- Goose
- Continue
- Kilo Code
- Junie
- Trae
- OpenHands
- Qwen Code
- AI Agent
- Tabnine Chat
- Sourcegraph Cody
- Amazon Q
- Firebase Genkit
- Sweep
- Devin
- Phind
- Mentat
- Claude Desktop
- Aider
- GPT Pilot
- Plandex
- bolt.new
- v0
- Replit Agent
- Anse
- TypingMind
- BetterChatGPT
- LibreChat
- Warp AI
- Pieces
- Fig AI
Embed badge
[](https://verified-skill.com/skills/zby/commonplace/evaluate-scenarios)