跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

model-bench

Run a 3-leg evaluation against a newly released LLM. Leg 1 is trap questions with deterministic answers, leg 2 is an agentic orchestration task with a planted failure, leg 3 is a brownfield feature build in a real repo. Use when the user wants to vibe-check, test, evaluate, or compare a new frontier model, or mentions model-bench, model vibe check, or launch-day protocol.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

查看安装方法

包含的文件(7)

  • SKILL.md4.7 KB
  • grading/answer-key.md770 B
  • grading/rubrics.md1.4 KB
  • results/.gitkeep0 B
  • tasks/leg-1.md3.5 KB
  • tasks/leg-2.md1.4 KB
  • tasks/leg-3.md1.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

model-bench

3 legs, each aimed at a different failure mode:

  1. Trap questions: does it think, or pattern-match to training data? Deterministic answers, grades in seconds.
  2. Orchestration: can it plan, delegate, and recover when a step fails (including a planted trap)?
  3. Brownfield build: can it ship a feature into an existing codebase without breaking things 2 files away?

Each leg scores 0-5. Total out of 15.

Contamination rules (read first)

  • The model under test must NEVER see gold answers or learn about the planted trap. If it does, that leg is void.
  • Private answer key lives outside this repo: ~/proctor/model-bench/answer-key.md (or grading/answer-key.local.md, gitignored). Public stub: grading/answer-key.md. Legs 2–3 checklists: grading/rubrics.md.
  • This skill runs in a proctor session (Nate plus a model he already trusts). The model under test only ever receives the task prompts — never this skill folder, never the private key.
  • Never use this repo as the target repo for legs 2–3.
  • Leg 1 isolation: launch each question in a context with no access to this workspace (no tools / empty workspace / chat-only). If the target model can Read files here, the leg is void.
  • One fresh session per leg. No custom system prompts or rules that would coach the model.

Workflow

Progress:
- [ ] Setup: pick target model, pick target repo, verify leg 2 plant
- [ ] Leg 1: proctor launches 5 parallel subagents (one question each), record final answers
- [ ] Leg 2: paste orchestration task into a fresh agent session on the target repo
- [ ] Leg 3: paste brownfield spec into a fresh agent session, branch per model
- [ ] Grade leg 1 with the private answer key; legs 2–3 with grading/rubrics.md
- [ ] Fill scorecard, save to results/, write 2-3 sentence verdict per model

Setup

  • Target repo for legs 2-3: a real repo with existing conventions, ideally one Nate knows well enough to judge output quality. Never this repo.
  • Verify the leg 2 planted path (default docs/METRICS.md) does not exist in the target repo. If it does, pick another plausible-but-missing path and note it.
  • When comparing models, use identical prompts, identical repo state, and a fresh branch per model (vibe/<model-name>).

Run the legs

Leg 1 (proctor-driven) The proctor AI runs leg 1. Do not make the human paste questions. Launch 5 parallel subagents with the target model slug, each receiving exactly one fenced question from tasks/leg-1.md and nothing else. Record final answers only. Isolation: those subagents must not be able to read this repo (no tools, or empty/disposable workspace). Same-workspace leg 1 = void. If the target model has no subagent slug (common on launch day), use five fresh chats the same way — still proctor-driven, not human paste. Do not use subagents for legs 2–3 in this workspace. Those legs run in separate sessions on the target repo.

Grade

  • Leg 1 gold: private key at ~/proctor/model-bench/answer-key.md (see grading/answer-key.md stub)
  • Legs 2–3: grading/rubrics.md
  • Only open the private key after all legs have been run, and never in a session where the target model is active.

Results

Save each filled scorecard to results/YYYY-MM-DD.md (append -2, -3 for multiple runs on one day). Use this template:

# Vibe check: [date]

Target repo: [repo]
Leg 2 plant: [path used]
Leg 3 spec: [feature, one line] / planted ambiguity: [what it was]

| Leg | [Model A] | [Model B] | [Model C] |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Trap questions (/5) | | | |
| 2. Orchestration (/5) | | | |
| 3. Brownfield (/5) | | | |
| **Total (/15)** | | | |

Verdict per model: which legs it won, what surprised me, does it earn a spot in the rotation.

Notes

  • Public trap questions decay. When a question gets 3 passes in a row across model families, retire it and add a fresh one to the bank.
  • Different models winning different legs is the expected (and most interesting) result. Record it, it's post material.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

adhd

免费

Formats output for ADHD-friendly action — lead with the next step, number tasks, restate state, cut fluff. Use when named (adhd), when the user mentions ADHD or focus/executive-function constraints, or when they ask for steps they can execute immediately.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

nateslabach/skills62026年9月29日 更新

Devil's-advocate attack on AI workflow designs — threat model, assumption challenges, code critiques, and hypothetical redesigns with no file edits. Use for "attack this design", devil's advocate, or hostile challenge on agents/tools/summarization/tokens. Not for PR peer review (code-review) or self-review that applies fixes (ai-systems-review). Prefer: this skill → decide → ai-systems-review.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

nateslabach/skills62026年9月29日 更新

Hostile self-review of recently written AI workflow code that then applies fixes (agents, tools, chat context, summarization, tokens, attachments). Use after generating AI systems code, or when asked to self-review and harden it. Not for PR peer review (code-review) or no-edit devil's-advocate attacks (adversarial-challenge). Prefer: adversarial-challenge → decide → this skill.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

nateslabach/skills62026年9月29日 更新

Writes in ASD-STE100 simplified technical English — short sentences, plain words, active voice. Use when the user wants terse technical prose, names this skill, or asks for STE100.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

nateslabach/skills62026年9月29日 更新

branding

免费

Builds personal brand assets using Seth Godin's frameworks: signature symbol, slogan, surprise (Purple Cow), salient idea, and signature story. Use when named (branding), or when the user asks for a brand symbol, slogan, tagline, Purple Cow, counterintuitive angle, core idea, brand story, or personal brand positioning.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

nateslabach/skills62026年9月29日 更新

Disables the AI's default hedging, diplomatic softening, and social-nicety layers to deliver cold, unfiltered, consequentialist analysis on any topic. Use when the user wants the AI's actual assessment without padding, regardless of how harsh or uncomfortable the honest answer is.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

nateslabach/skills62026年9月29日 更新

查看 nateslabach 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题