@trazum/core 1.80.1 → 1.82.0

package/src/verdict-bridge.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,200 @@
+/**
+ * Reading a dropped `route --json` verdict, so quality can stand beside cost.
+ *
+ * The bill is arithmetic: every figure in it comes from records already on
+ * disk, and it can say exactly what a cheaper model would have saved. It can
+ * say nothing at all about whether that model still does the job. That answer
+ * costs provider calls and a credential, which is why `trazum route` exists
+ * and why no surface that only reads a log will ever produce it.
+ *
+ * This is the bridge between the two, and it is deliberately one-directional:
+ * the measurement is made where the credential is, written out as the
+ * `routing-measurement` contract, and read back here by a pure function that
+ * touches no network and holds no key. A reader who has run `route` once can
+ * carry the verdict to any surface that prices the same workload.
+ *
+ * It was not possible to write until the document was worth reading. Before
+ * the JSON-text sweep, `route --json` printed the whole `EvalReport` — every
+ * case input and three model answers per case — so a bridge would have been a
+ * feature for carrying prompt text into a browser. The document carries the
+ * measurement and nothing else now, and `conform` is what says so rather than
+ * this file's own reading: the contract validates, the bridge only maps.
+ */
+
+import { conform } from './conform.js';
+import type { EvalVerdict } from './evaluate.js';
+import { UNLABELLED } from './usage.js';
+
+/** What a dropped routing measurement says, mapped onto what a bill can match. */
+export interface DroppedVerdict {
+  /** The workload the measurement was made on, or null when it was unlabelled. */
+  label: string | null;
+  /**
+   * The model those calls go to today, from the bill's own slice.
+   *
+   * Not the model that answered. `route` builds its baseline provider from
+   * the environment, so the model in the measurement is whatever
+   * `TRAZUM_LLM_MODEL` names, and it is only the log's model when the reader
+   * configured it that way. Pairing on it matched nothing on a real run
+   * against an OpenAI-compatible endpoint — `evaluation.model` said
+   * `stub-strong` while the log said `claude-opus-5` — and the bill would
+   * have shown no verdict at all with no explanation.
+   */
+  model: string;
+  /**
+   * The model that actually answered, when it is not the one the log records.
+   *
+   * Null when they agree, which is the ordinary case. Not null is worth
+   * saying out loud rather than smoothing over: a verdict measured on a
+   * stand-in is a weaker claim about this workload than one measured on the
+   * model the workload actually uses, and only this field can tell the
+   * difference.
+   */
+  measuredOn: string | null;
+  /** The model measured against it. */
+  candidateModel: string;
+  verdict: EvalVerdict;
+  /** The model's agreement with itself. The yardstick the other rate is read against. */
+  selfAgreement: number;
+  /** Agreement between the two models, same prompt on both sides. */
+  crossAgreement: number;
+  /** Cases the measurement covered, so a two-case verdict cannot pose as a hundred. */
+  cases: number;
+  /** Calls it cost to reach. */
+  callsMade: number;
+  /**
+   * What the measurement's own bill priced the route at, when the document
+   * carried it. Null rather than zero when it did not: a saving nobody
+   * measured is not a saving of nothing.
+   */
+  savingUsd: number | null;
+}
+
+/**
+ * What the bridge did with a file.
+ *
+ * `null` is not a failure: it means the file is not a routing measurement at
+ * all, and the caller should go on treating it as whatever else it was. A
+ * refusal is the other case — it looked like one and could not be read — and
+ * it names what is missing, because a refusal with nothing after it is
+ * indistinguishable from a bug.
+ */
+export type BridgeReading =
+  | { kind: 'verdict'; verdict: DroppedVerdict }
+  | { kind: 'refusal'; because: string };
+
+const isObject = (value: unknown): value is Record<string, unknown> =>
+  typeof value === 'object' && value !== null && !Array.isArray(value);
+
+/**
+ * Whether this file is even claiming to be a routing measurement.
+ *
+ * Shape only, and deliberately narrow: an `evaluation` object carrying a
+ * `verdict`. Anything looser would swallow a usage log or a profile and
+ * refuse it in this file's words instead of letting the caller price it.
+ */
+function claimsToBeOne(parsed: unknown): boolean {
+  if (!isObject(parsed)) return false;
+  const evaluation = parsed.evaluation;
+  return isObject(evaluation) && typeof evaluation.verdict === 'string';
+}
+
+/**
+ * Reads a dropped `trazum route --json` document.
+ *
+ * Returns null when the text is something else entirely. Validation is
+ * `conform`'s, against the published `routing-measurement` contract, so this
+ * function cannot drift from the schema a connector author builds against —
+ * and a document that fails carries the contract's own sentences back to the
+ * reader rather than a second opinion written here.
+ */
+export function readDroppedVerdict(text: string): BridgeReading | null {
+  let parsed: unknown;
+  try {
+    parsed = JSON.parse(text);
+  } catch {
+    return null;
+  }
+  if (!claimsToBeOne(parsed)) return null;
+
+  const report = conform(text, { contract: 'routing-measurement' });
+  if (!report.conforms) {
+    const detail =
+      report.problems.length > 0
+        ? report.problems.map((problem) => `${problem.at}: ${problem.detail}`).join('; ')
+        : (report.because ?? 'it does not match the routing-measurement contract');
+    return { kind: 'refusal', because: detail };
+  }
+
+  const document = parsed as { slice?: unknown; evaluation?: unknown };
+  const slice = isObject(document.slice) ? document.slice : {};
+  const evaluation = document.evaluation as Record<string, unknown>;
+
+  /**
+   * Every field below is read defensively even though `conform` has passed,
+   * because the contract requires `slice` and `evaluation` to be objects and
+   * says nothing about what is inside them. A document from a future version
+   * with a thinner slice is a document this reads what it can from, not one
+   * it crashes on.
+   */
+  const answered = typeof evaluation.model === 'string' ? evaluation.model : null;
+  // The slice's model first: that is the fact the bill can be matched against.
+  const model = typeof slice.model === 'string' ? slice.model : answered;
+  const candidateModel =
+    typeof evaluation.candidateModel === 'string' ? evaluation.candidateModel : null;
+  const verdict = typeof evaluation.verdict === 'string' ? (evaluation.verdict as EvalVerdict) : null;
+  if (model === null || candidateModel === null || verdict === null) {
+    return {
+      kind: 'refusal',
+      because:
+        'the evaluation names no model, candidate model or verdict, so there is nothing to set beside a bill',
+    };
+  }
+
+  const number = (value: unknown): number => (typeof value === 'number' ? value : 0);
+  const route = isObject(slice.route) ? slice.route : null;
+  const rawLabel = typeof slice.label === 'string' ? slice.label : null;
+
+  return {
+    kind: 'verdict',
+    verdict: {
+      // `UNLABELLED` is the profile's own sentinel for calls that carry no
+      // label. It travels through the document as that sentinel and comes
+      // back as null here, so the bridge speaks the bill's language rather
+      // than leaking an internal marker into a caption.
+      label: rawLabel === null || rawLabel === UNLABELLED ? null : rawLabel,
+      model,
+      measuredOn: answered !== null && answered !== model ? answered : null,
+      candidateModel,
+      verdict,
+      selfAgreement: number(evaluation.selfAgreement),
+      crossAgreement: number(evaluation.crossAgreement),
+      cases: Array.isArray(evaluation.cases) ? evaluation.cases.length : 0,
+      callsMade: number(evaluation.callsMade),
+      savingUsd: route !== null && typeof route.savingUsd === 'number' ? route.savingUsd : null,
+    },
+  };
+}
+
+/**
+ * Whether a verdict describes the route a given slice of the bill is offering.
+ *
+ * Both halves must agree or the pairing is a lie: the same workload, the same
+ * model it goes to now, and the same candidate. A verdict measured on `chat`
+ * shown against `summarise`'s saving would be the exact fault this repository
+ * keeps finding in itself — a number describing something other than what was
+ * measured — and matching on the model alone would produce it on any log with
+ * two workloads on one model.
+ */
+export function verdictMatchesSlice(
+  verdict: DroppedVerdict,
+  slice: { label: string; model: string; route: { candidate: { id: string } } | null },
+): boolean {
+  if (slice.route === null) return false;
+  const sliceLabel = slice.label === UNLABELLED ? null : slice.label;
+  return (
+    sliceLabel === verdict.label &&
+    slice.model === verdict.model &&
+    slice.route.candidate.id === verdict.candidateModel
+  );
+}