@malloy-publisher/skills 0.1.19 → 0.1.21

package/skills/eval-answer/scripts/score_retrieval.py

@@ -11,19 +11,27 @@ This is the customer's question. For a case with a known answer, did the agent R
 the entities the answer needs? It is mechanical, exact, and per-case, and it is
 what makes a wrong answer attributable:
 
-  recall 1.0 and the answer is wrong -> retrieval delivered everything, so the
-  failure is construction, and no embedding or ranking work will fix it.
+  recall 1.0 and the answer is wrong -> retrieval delivered everything, so no
+  embedding or ranking work will fix it. Whether the agent misused what it had
+  or the docs never said how to use it is eval-diagnose's call, sufficiency
+  first, so the row reads "delivered, wrong" and names no owner.
 
   recall below 1.0 -> the agent never had the entity. Coverage then says whose
-  problem that is: `covered` means the entity was there and search missed it;
-  `derivable` or `absent` means there was nothing to surface. (An earlier
-  version of this text said "no query-writing skill would have saved it"; that
-  was false whenever the set named one route and the model offered another,
-  which is what `requiredAnyOf` below exists to express.)
-
-Those two look identical in an answer score and have opposite owners. Components
+  problem that is: `covered` means the entity was there and search missed it,
+  which from the customer's side is a documentation finding -- the retrieval
+  algorithm is fixed, semantic search over doc strings, so an entity that exists
+  and does not come back is one whose docs do not say what people ask
+  (eval-diagnose NOT-RETURNED, owner model). `derivable` or `absent` means there
+  was nothing to surface. (An earlier version of this text said "no
+  query-writing skill would have saved it"; that was false whenever the set
+  named one route and the model offered another, which is what `requiredAnyOf`
+  below exists to express.) No label at all means nobody has measured it, and
+  the row says so instead of asserting a model gap.
+
+Those look identical in an answer score and have different owners. Components
 and owners match eval-diagnose's taxonomy so the output drops into `issue` events
-without translation.
+without translation; a label that named the engine ("retrieval ranking") did
+not, and was corrected.
 
 INPUTS
 
@@ -37,8 +45,8 @@ INPUTS
 `required` lists entities the answer cannot be produced without. `requiredAnyOf`
 lists GROUPS, each satisfied by any one member: the case can be answered through
 either route, and naming only one would score the other as a retrieval miss --
-which then steers diagnosis to "retrieval ranking" for a failure that was never
-retrieval's. Every `required` entity is a group of one.
+which then steers the fix to the docs for an entity whose docs were never the
+problem. Every `required` entity is a group of one.
 
 WHAT COUNTS AS DELIVERED
 
@@ -54,6 +62,11 @@ recoverable.
 `rankedSummary.entityIds`), `attempt` (for `submitted`), and `score` (for
 `verdict`). Everything else is ignored.
 
+`--coverage` is optional: a `check_coverage.py --out` report. Its per-case
+verdict is a measurement against this build and beats the case's authored
+`coverage` label; `coverage_source` on each row says which one attribution
+used, and `none` means neither existed and nobody gets charged.
+
 WHAT COUNTS
 
 Recall is over `required`. Precision counts anything outside `acceptable` as
@@ -80,14 +93,64 @@ from typing import Any
 # rather than silently mislabelling every issue this script emits. The third
 # element is the human label -- "owner" reads like a person, and the value people
 # actually want from this column is where to go and fix it.
-CONSTRUCTION = ("construction", "agent-skill", "query construction")
-RETRIEVAL = ("get_context/retrieval", "retrieval", "retrieval ranking")
+# Delivered everything and still wrong. eval-diagnose attributes construction
+# "only after sufficiency": first establish that the docs said enough to use the
+# entity correctly. WRONG-PICK is the model's if the docs did not distinguish the
+# candidates, SCOPE is the model's if the rule was undocumented, CONVENTION is
+# the model's ("expose a named measure"). So this row names no owner. An earlier
+# version charged every such case to the agent, which is how a documentation gap
+# gets filed as a skills bug and never fixed.
+DELIVERED = ("construction", "undecided", "delivered, wrong")
+# Covered, asked for by the right KIND of search, and it still did not come
+# back. Two live causes, and this run cannot separate them: the docs do not
+# describe the entity the way the question phrases it, or the search vocabulary
+# was off. They have different owners, so the label names the OUTCOME and
+# leaves the owner undecided; eval-diagnose separates them (NOT-RETURNED and
+# LOW-RANK are the model's, QUESTION-VOCAB and VAGUE the agent's, and its
+# RETRIEVAL code needs a rare-token proof that is never assigned mechanically
+# here). Two earlier labels are both wrong and are worth naming because each
+# looks reasonable: "retrieval ranking" names the engine, which from the
+# customer's side is fixed and not the thing anyone can edit; `documentation`
+# asserts one of the two causes outright, and was contradicted on the first
+# real run.
+NOT_RETURNED = ("get_context", "undecided", "not retrieved")
+# Never issued a search for that kind of entity at all. eval-diagnose's
+# NEVER-ASKED / WRONG-TYPE-OR-SCOPE, owner agent-skill. Mechanical and certain:
+# a measure cannot be returned by a search that asked only for dimensions.
+NEVER_ASKED = ("get_context/agent-call", "agent-skill", "never asked")
 MODEL = ("get_context/model", "model", "model coverage")
-# A case whose coverage is `absent` should have been declined. Answering it is an
-# answerer failure, so it shares construction's component and owner, but it is
-# worth its own label: the fix is refusal behaviour, not query-writing.
+# A case whose coverage is `absent` should have been declined. Answering it is
+# the answerer's, and documentation cannot help when there is nothing to
+# document; its own label because the fix is refusal behaviour, not query-writing.
 REFUSAL = ("construction", "agent-skill", "refusal behaviour")
 UNATTRIBUTED = ("", "", "")
+# Coverage values that were MEASURED and found nothing to surface. Only these
+# may send a retrieval miss to the model: the authored labels `derivable` and
+# `absent`, and check_coverage.py's four gap verdicts, which are eval-diagnose's
+# codes. The four must match `check_coverage.FAIL_VERDICTS`; the test pins that,
+# because this file stays stdlib-only and does not import it.
+MEASURED_GAPS = ("derivable", "absent",
+                 "COVERAGE", "AMBIGUOUS", "NO-DISAMBIG", "CONVENTION")
+# check_coverage.py's "a correct answer is expressible": the measured `covered`.
+MEASURED_OK = "ok"
+# A failure that is retrieval's or the model's, and nothing measured which. Its
+# own bucket, because the alternative was worse: with no authored `coverage`
+# label the case fell through to MODEL with the words "coverage is unknown, so
+# the entity does not exist" -- a model gap asserted on no evidence, on exactly
+# the sets that arrive as bare questions with no labels. `unknown` as the
+# conservative reading is eval-diagnose's own convention for `sufficiency`; it
+# is not a new owner, it is the absence of one.
+UNMEASURED = ("get_context", "unknown", "coverage not measured")
+# A case whose coverage was measured as fine and which names no required
+# entities, so retrieval was never measured for it. Its own label because both
+# neighbours assert something this row has no evidence for: REFUSAL says the
+# question was unanswerable, DELIVERED says every required entity arrived. It
+# used to take REFUSAL, which blamed the answerer for "not declining" a
+# perfectly answerable question purely because `expectedEntities` was left out
+# -- and case-format.md says to leave it out, so that was the ordinary case.
+# Owner `unknown` on purpose: LEVER_BY_OWNER yields no lever for it, which is
+# the point. Nothing here knows whose fix this is.
+NO_ENTITIES = ("undecided", "unknown", "retrieval not measured")
 
 PASSING = {"match", "near_match"}
 # Verdicts the acceptance check counts as neither a pass nor a failure.
@@ -113,12 +176,44 @@ def attempt_key(e: dict[str, Any]) -> tuple:
     return (e.get("qid"), e.get("sample"), e.get("phase"))
 
 
+# Which entity KINDS each search target type can return. Mirrors
+# `KINDS_BY_TARGET` in the server's get_context tool, and `test_kinds_by_target_
+# matches_the_server` pins it against that file, because this module stays
+# stdlib-only and cannot import TypeScript. Getting this wrong in either
+# direction misattributes a miss: too narrow and the agent is blamed for not
+# asking when it did, too wide and a real never-asked reads as a retrieval
+# failure.
+#
+# `target_type` is a HARD FILTER on the server, which is what makes a miss of
+# this shape mechanical rather than a judgement: no amount of documentation can
+# deliver a measure to a search that asked only for dimensions.
+KINDS_BY_TARGET = {
+    "source": {"source"},
+    "dimension": {"dimension"},
+    "measure": {"measure"},
+    # A model-level named query is a pre-built analysis, which is what the
+    # published shape says a `view` target is for.
+    "view": {"view", "query"},
+    "join": {"join"},
+    # Publisher indexes no dimensional values, so this target selects nothing.
+    "dimensional_value": set(),
+}
+
+
 def retrieved(events: list[dict[str, Any]],
-              key: tuple) -> tuple[list[str], int, set[str]]:
+              key: tuple) -> tuple[list[str], int, set[str], set[str]]:
     """Entities pooled over the attempt's get_context calls, the call count,
-    and every identifier named in the returned sources' documentation."""
+    every identifier named in the returned sources' documentation, and the
+    entity KINDS the agent actually searched for.
+
+    The kinds matter: a measure cannot come back from a search that asked only
+    for a source and a dimension, and that is the agent's miss rather than the
+    model's. `targets` on the tool_call records what was asked, phrased
+    `"measure: count of titles"`, so the distinction is mechanical.
+    """
     seen: dict[str, None] = {}
     tokens: set[str] = set()
+    asked: set[str] = set()
     calls = 0
     for e in events:
         if e.get("kind") != "tool_call" or e.get("tool") != "get_context":
@@ -130,7 +225,26 @@ def retrieved(events: list[dict[str, Any]],
         for eid in rs.get("entityIds") or []:
             seen.setdefault(eid, None)
         tokens.update(rs.get("docTokens") or [])
-    return list(seen), calls, tokens
+        # `target_shapes` when the run recorded it: it keeps EVERY target,
+        # including one carrying no `search_text`, which `targets` drops
+        # because there is no term to record. Reading only `targets` scored an
+        # agent that enumerated all measures as never having asked for one.
+        shapes = e.get("target_shapes")
+        if shapes:
+            for t in shapes:
+                if isinstance(t, dict) and t.get("type"):
+                    asked.add(str(t["type"]).strip().lower())
+        else:
+            for t in e.get("targets") or []:
+                if isinstance(t, str) and ":" in t:
+                    asked.add(t.split(":", 1)[0].strip().lower())
+                elif isinstance(t, dict) and t.get("target_type"):
+                    asked.add(str(t["target_type"]).strip().lower())
+    # Expand target types to the kinds they can actually return, so a `view`
+    # target counts as having asked for a model-level named query.
+    reachable = set().union(*(KINDS_BY_TARGET.get(a, {a}) for a in asked)) \
+        if asked else set()
+    return list(seen), calls, tokens, reachable
 
 
 def split_entity(eid: str) -> tuple[str, str, str]:
@@ -165,7 +279,9 @@ def groups(exp: dict[str, Any]) -> list[list[str]]:
     return out
 
 
-def attribute(recall: float | None, coverage: str, passed: bool | None) -> tuple:
+def attribute(recall: float | None, coverage: str, passed: bool | None,
+              missing_kinds: set[str] | None = None,
+              asked_kinds: set[str] | None = None) -> tuple:
     """Where to fix this outcome. Returns (component, owner, label, why).
 
     EVERY failure gets attributed. An earlier version returned nothing when
@@ -173,36 +289,122 @@ def attribute(recall: float | None, coverage: str, passed: bool | None) -> tuple
     counted as failures in the score table and appeared under no heading here,
     so the two never summed to the same number.
     """
-    if passed:
-        return (*UNATTRIBUTED, "passed")
+    # NO short-circuit on `passed`: recall is read before the verdict is. A
+    # short-circuit attributes a case that answered correctly while never
+    # receiving a required entity to nobody, and `summarise()` then drops it
+    # because the empty label is falsy, so no issue can ever be raised for it.
+    # Measured on one run: 4 of 5 undelivered entities sat on passing cases.
+    #
+    # "It worked anyway" is not a reason to leave the gap. The answer being
+    # right is recorded on the row (`failed`, `verdict`) and reported
+    # separately, so attributing the miss does not move the pass rate.
     if passed is None:
         # needs_human or unscorable. Neither a pass nor a failure, so it must not
         # be attributed -- doing so would inflate whichever bucket it landed in.
         return (*UNATTRIBUTED, "not scored")
     if recall is None:
-        # No required entities, which in this set means coverage is `absent`.
-        # The case failed, so the answerer produced something for a question the
-        # model cannot answer.
-        return (*REFUSAL,
-                "the model cannot answer this and the answerer did not decline")
+        # Two different shapes reach here, and they were conflated. `absent`
+        # coverage means the model genuinely cannot answer, so declining is the
+        # pass and answering is the answerer's fault. A case that simply names
+        # no required entities is NOT that: the question may be perfectly
+        # answerable, and all that is true is that retrieval went unmeasured.
+        if coverage == "absent":
+            if passed:
+                # It declined a question the model cannot answer, which is the
+                # right behaviour and the pass. Nothing to attribute.
+                return (*UNATTRIBUTED, "declined an unanswerable question")
+            return (*REFUSAL,
+                    "the model cannot answer this and the answerer did not decline")
+        if passed:
+            return (*UNATTRIBUTED,
+                    "correct; the case names no required entities, so retrieval "
+                    "was not measured for it")
+        return (*NO_ENTITIES,
+                "the answer was wrong and the case names no required entities, "
+                "so nothing here can say whether retrieval delivered. Add "
+                "`expectedEntities.required` to measure it, or diagnose the "
+                "failure directly")
     if recall >= 1.0:
-        return (*CONSTRUCTION,
-                "retrieval delivered every required entity; the failure is in the query")
-    if coverage == "covered":
-        return (*RETRIEVAL,
-                "the entity exists in the model and was not returned")
-    return (*MODEL,
-            f"nothing to return: coverage is {coverage}, so the entity does not exist")
+        if passed:
+            # Everything arrived and the answer was right. The only shape with
+            # genuinely nothing to report.
+            return (*UNATTRIBUTED, "delivered and correct")
+        return (*DELIVERED,
+                "retrieval delivered every required entity; the failure is in how "
+                "it was used, or in docs that never said how to use it. Diagnose "
+                "decides which, sufficiency first")
+    # Below here recall is < 1.0: a required entity did not reach the answerer.
+    # That is attributed whether or not the answer came out right, because an
+    # answer that was right WITHOUT the entity was right by another route --
+    # most often the agent rebuilding the model's own measure inline, which is
+    # correct only while the measure is trivial.
+    if coverage in ("covered", MEASURED_OK):
+        unasked = sorted((missing_kinds or set()) - (asked_kinds or set()))
+        if unasked:
+            return (*NEVER_ASKED,
+                    f"the entity exists and no search asked for a "
+                    f"{'/'.join(unasked)} at all, so nothing of that kind could "
+                    f"come back (eval-diagnose NEVER-ASKED)")
+        return (*NOT_RETURNED,
+                "the entity exists, a search of the right kind was issued, and it "
+                "did not come back. The docs may not say what this question asks, "
+                "or the search wording may be off; eval-diagnose separates "
+                "NOT-RETURNED from QUESTION-VOCAB. Assumes a semantic run")
+    if coverage in MEASURED_GAPS:
+        return (*MODEL,
+                f"nothing to return: coverage is {coverage}, so the entity does not exist")
+    return (*UNMEASURED,
+            "recall below 1.0 and coverage was never measured for this case; run "
+            "check_coverage.py before calling this a model gap or a retrieval miss")
+
+
+def load_coverage_report(path: str) -> dict[str, str | None]:
+    """`qid -> verdict` from a `check_coverage.py --out` report.
+
+    That report used to be written and read by nothing. This is the read. A
+    case whose measurement was undecided carries None and falls back to whatever
+    else the case has, and `coverage_source` on the row says which won.
+    """
+    with open(path) as fh:
+        data = json.load(fh)
+    return {r["qid"]: r.get("verdict") for r in data.get("cases_detail", [])}
+
+
+def coverage_report_summary(path: str) -> dict[str, Any]:
+    """What run.json records about a coverage report it consumed.
+
+    Enough to say which measurement charged the failures: the file, the model
+    version it was stamped with, the judge that decided it, and how much of the
+    set it actually decided. `decided` of `cases` matters more than the
+    percentage: a report that decided 4 of 49 is not a coverage number, it is a
+    sample size.
+    """
+    with open(path) as fh:
+        d = json.load(fh)
+    return {"path": path, "version": d.get("version"),
+            "agentModel": d.get("agentModel"),
+            "decided": d.get("decided"), "cases": d.get("cases")}
 
 
 def score_case(case: dict[str, Any], events: list[dict[str, Any]],
-               key: tuple, verdict: str | None) -> dict[str, Any]:
-    coverage = case.get("coverage", "unknown")
+               key: tuple, verdict: str | None,
+               measured: str | None = None) -> dict[str, Any]:
+    # A measured verdict beats the authored label. The label is a standing hand
+    # judgement about the question; the verdict is a measurement against THIS
+    # build, which is the thing an attribution is about. Neither present reads
+    # "unknown", which attribute() refuses to charge to anyone.
+    if measured is not None:
+        coverage, coverage_source = measured, "measured"
+    elif case.get("coverage") is not None:
+        coverage, coverage_source = case["coverage"], "authored"
+    else:
+        coverage, coverage_source = "unknown", "none"
     exp = case.get("expectedEntities") or {}
     req_groups = groups(exp)
     required = {e for g in req_groups for e in g}
-    acceptable = set(exp.get("acceptable") or []) | required
-    got, calls, tokens = retrieved(events, key)
+    authored_acceptable = set(exp.get("acceptable") or [])
+    acceptable = authored_acceptable | required
+    got, calls, tokens, asked = retrieved(events, key)
     got_set = set(got)
     route = {e: delivery(e, got_set, tokens) for e in sorted(required)}
     delivered = {e for e, r in route.items() if r != "missing"}
@@ -226,21 +428,41 @@ def score_case(case: dict[str, Any], events: list[dict[str, Any]],
                          if not any(e in delivered for e in g))
         noise = sorted(got_set - acceptable)
 
-    component, owner, where_to_fix, why = attribute(recall, coverage, passed)
+    # Only a group NO member satisfied, the same guard `missing` uses above. A
+    # `requiredAnyOf` group names alternate routes to one need, so the routes
+    # not taken are not missing and their kinds are not unasked-for. Collecting
+    # every undelivered member instead let a satisfied group contribute a
+    # phantom kind, and `attribute` read that as NEVER-ASKED: a case whose real
+    # miss was a dimension the agent DID search for came back owned by
+    # agent-skill, "no search asked for a join at all". That is the
+    # charge-the-agent default this file exists to remove.
+    missing_kinds = {split_entity(e)[0] for g in req_groups
+                     if not any(e in delivered for e in g) for e in g}
+    component, owner, where_to_fix, why = attribute(
+        recall, coverage, passed, missing_kinds, asked)
     return {
         "qid": case["qid"],
         "sample": key[1],
         "phase": key[2],
         "coverage": coverage,
+        "coverage_source": coverage_source,
         "verdict": verdict,
         "failed": passed is False,
         "recall": recall,
         "precision": precision,
         "n_required": len(req_groups),
         "n_returned": len(got_set),
+        # Precision reads everything outside `acceptable` as noise, so a set
+        # that never authored one scores every legitimate extra as a miss. The
+        # flag travels with the row so a reader knows which they are looking at.
+        "has_acceptable": bool(authored_acceptable),
         "delivery": route,
         "n_ranked": sum(1 for r in route.values() if r in ("exact", "alias")),
         "n_get_context": calls,
+        # What the agent asked for, so a reader can judge the search rather than
+        # take the label's word for it -- and so a set can be surveyed for the
+        # vocabulary its questions actually need.
+        "asked_kinds": sorted(asked),
         "missing": missing,
         "noise": noise,
         "component": component,
@@ -269,10 +491,68 @@ def summarise(rows: list[dict[str, Any]]) -> dict[str, Any]:
         "mean_precision": mean([r["precision"] for r in scored
                                 if r["precision"] is not None]),
         "complete_retrievals": sum(1 for r in scored if r["recall"] >= 1.0),
+        # How much get_context handed back, and how much of it the answer
+        # needed. Unlike precision these do not depend on `acceptable` being
+        # authored, so they say something about retrieval on any set.
+        "mean_returned": mean([r["n_returned"] for r in scored]),
+        "mean_required": mean([r["n_required"] for r in scored]),
+        "cases_with_acceptable": sum(1 for r in rows if r.get("has_acceptable")),
         "failures_by_where_to_fix": placed,
     }
 
 
+def cascade(rows: list[dict[str, Any]]) -> dict[str, int]:
+    """The three metrics as a funnel, because each one conditions the next.
+
+    A case the model cannot express has no meaningful retrieval or answer result;
+    a case whose entity never arrived has no meaningful answer result. Reported
+    as three independent percentages those read as three unrelated problems.
+    Reported as a cascade, each failure sits at the one rung that owns it, and
+    the rungs sum to the row count so a reader can check the arithmetic.
+    """
+    c = {"total": len(rows), "not covered": 0, "unmeasured": 0,
+         "no entities named": 0, "not retrieved": 0, "delivered, wrong": 0,
+         "delivered, right": 0, "not scored": 0,
+         # Passes that stop on an earlier rung. Without these the funnel looks
+         # like it contradicts the pass rate: a run where every case matched
+         # read "correct? 6 yes" because two passed despite a coverage gap and
+         # incomplete retrieval, and 6 is exactly the number a reader would
+         # mistake for the score.
+         #
+         # EVERY rung that can hold a pass carries one. The two below were
+         # missing, and they are the rungs the ordinary case lands on:
+         # `expectedEntities` is "almost never present" per case-format.md, so
+         # a passing case with no entities named went into `no entities named`,
+         # which had no counter, and vanished from the identity
+         # `passes = delivered_right + the passed_* overlays`. The test that
+         # pins that identity never caught it because every row it builds
+         # supplies a required entity.
+         "passed_not_covered": 0, "passed_not_retrieved": 0,
+         "passed_unmeasured": 0, "passed_no_entities_named": 0}
+    for r in rows:
+        cov = r["coverage"]
+        passed = not r["failed"] and r["verdict"] not in UNSCORED
+        if cov in MEASURED_GAPS:
+            c["not covered"] += 1
+            c["passed_not_covered"] += passed
+        elif cov not in ("covered", MEASURED_OK):
+            c["unmeasured"] += 1
+            c["passed_unmeasured"] += passed
+        elif r["recall"] is None:
+            c["no entities named"] += 1
+            c["passed_no_entities_named"] += passed
+        elif r["recall"] < 1.0:
+            c["not retrieved"] += 1
+            c["passed_not_retrieved"] += passed
+        elif r["verdict"] in UNSCORED:
+            c["not scored"] += 1
+        elif r["failed"]:
+            c["delivered, wrong"] += 1
+        else:
+            c["delivered, right"] += 1
+    return c
+
+
 def load(events_path, cases_path) -> tuple[dict, dict]:
     """(cases by qid, attempts by key) for anything scoring a run.
 
@@ -300,10 +580,14 @@ def main(argv: list[str] | None = None) -> int:
     ap.add_argument("--events", required=True)
     ap.add_argument("--cases", required=True)
     ap.add_argument("--json", action="store_true", help="emit rows as JSONL")
+    ap.add_argument("--coverage", default=None,
+                    help="a check_coverage.py --out report; its per-case verdict "
+                         "beats the authored `coverage` label")
     a = ap.parse_args(argv)
 
     events = read_jsonl(a.events)
     cases = {c["qid"]: c for c in read_jsonl(a.cases)}
+    measured = load_coverage_report(a.coverage) if a.coverage else {}
 
     verdicts = {attempt_key(e): e.get("verdict")
                 for e in events if e.get("kind") == "score"}
@@ -317,7 +601,8 @@ def main(argv: list[str] | None = None) -> int:
             print(f"warning: no case for qid {e.get('qid')!r}", file=sys.stderr)
             continue
         key = attempt_key(e)
-        rows.append(score_case(case, events, key, verdicts.get(key)))
+        rows.append(score_case(case, events, key, verdicts.get(key),
+                               measured.get(e.get("qid"))))
 
     rows.sort(key=lambda r: (r["qid"], str(r["sample"])))
     if a.json: