vultr/openclaw
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw.git synced 2026-05-06 18:40:44 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs: clarify parity verdict interpretation

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Eva
2026-04-11 03:30:59 +07:00
committed by Peter Steinberger
parent db09edacfc
commit c73d005c7a
2 changed files with 29 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
docs/help/gpt54-codex-agentic-parity-maintainers.md
View File

@@ -141,3 +141,13 @@ The parity harness is not the only evidence source. Keep this split explicit in
- PR D owns the scenario-based GPT-5.4 vs Opus 4.6 comparison
- PR B deterministic suites still own auth/proxy/DNS and full-access truthfulness evidence
## Reviewer shorthand: before vs after
| User-visible problem before | Review signal after |
| ----------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| GPT-5.4 stopped after planning | PR A shows act-or-block behavior instead of commentary-only completion |
| Tool use felt brittle with strict OpenAI/Codex schemas | PR C keeps tool registration and parameter-free invocation predictable |
| `/elevated full` hints were sometimes misleading | PR B ties guidance to actual runtime capability and blocked reasons |
| Long tasks could disappear into replay/compaction ambiguity | PR C emits explicit paused, blocked, abandoned, and replay-invalid state |
| Parity claims were anecdotal | PR D produces a report plus JSON verdict with the same scenario coverage on both models |