Repository navigation
Say that the explanation refusal belongs to one deployment - #40
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Both documents scoped the refusal to the shipping deployment and then described it in a way that reads as a property of the field. Explanation has been measured working against another relational deployment, returned and parsed onto PredictionResult.explanation, so a reader deciding whether to build on it was being told the wrong thing. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Manush Murali <manushm@nvidia.com>
The comment explaining why explanation_formats is empty named `kumo_rfm_v2_1` as coming from the shipping build. That build returns 422 UNSUPPORTED_OUTPUT for the field; the format name comes from the deployment that does serve it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Manush Murali <manushm@nvidia.com>
It is a protocol value the endpoint stamps on an explanation, and the engine branches on it to parse one. The comment beside an empty tuple is not where a reader needs to meet it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Manush Murali <manushm@nvidia.com>
Manushpm8
force-pushed
the
explanation-is-deployment-side
branch
from
October 16, 2026 01:01
32a3c38 to
b3fb6b1
Compare
A payload docstring cited the path of the smoke test it was mirrored from, inside a private repository. The hygiene check gains that name, so the bare term for the model a test talks to still passes while a path into that tree does not. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Manush Murali <manushm@nvidia.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
docs/about/architecture.mdandskills/relational/SKILL.mdboth scoped therefusal correctly ("that deployment", "the shipping deployment") and then
described it in a way that reads as a property of the field. A reader deciding
whether to build on
explanationcame away thinking nothing serves it.explanationhas been measured working against another relational deployment:the output is returned, the client parses it, and it arrives on
PredictionResult.explanation. So the client declaring it is correct, and the422 UNSUPPORTED_OUTPUTis a property of the narrower build.Both documents now say so, and the skill keeps its original advice. Ask, catch
the refusal, fall back, and do not assume one never arrives either.
Documentation only. Hygiene 4/4, root suite 255 passed.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code