context-benchmark
Skill3 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Measure context preparation across fixed cases. Use when token savings, hard-budget compliance, protected-fact recall, evidence anchors, determinism, runtime, or downstream answer quality must be demonstrated with reproducible evidence rather than marketing claims.
In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- context-auditSkill
- context-onpremiseSkill
- context-orchestratorSkill
- context-packSkill
- conversation-checkpointSkill
- context-economySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 16
Run a versioned manifest of independent cases and keep raw per-case results.
- Distinctive: line 25
document-route correctness, informative-visual recall, decorative/duplicate skip accuracy, and complex-table fidelity warnings for …
- Very specific: line 37
Keep failed cases visible and verify manifest version, fixture identity, budgets, settings, and denominators.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Context Benchmark
Designed, integrated, independently refactored, and continuously maintained by TIKAZ.
Inputs
Accept a versioned benchmark manifest, fixed source fixtures, declared budgets, protected facts, expected anchors, optional route labels, and an optional externally scored downstream-answer rubric. Use identical inputs and settings when comparing systems.
Workflow
Run a versioned manifest of independent cases and keep raw per-case results. Report efficiency and quality separately:
- source and packed tokens;
- final-budget compliance;
- protected-fact recall;
- evidence-anchor correctness;
- deterministic repeatability;
- preparation runtime;
- optional externally supplied answer score.
- document-route correctness, informative-visual recall, decorative/duplicate skip accuracy, and complex-table fidelity warnings for multimodal fixtures.
- retrieval Recall@K, Precision@K, MRR, nDCG@K, evidence-facet coverage, and explicit insufficient-evidence fallback on independently labeled cases.
- dynamic-selection count, selected-evidence recall and precision, facet coverage, and estimated selected-token reduction; never present reduction without the corresponding selection recall.
Do not hide failures inside averages. A smaller pack with lower fidelity is a regression, not a win. Do not claim superiority until the same files, questions, model/detail settings, budgets, and blind answer rubric are used. Use the shared CLI benchmark command and read ../references/benchmark-method.md when publishing results.
Output contract
Publish summary.json, metrics.json, raw cases.json, and the generated evidence card together. Keep context efficiency, exact-repeat prompt efficiency, literal fact and anchor fidelity, multimodal routing, and pending provider, vision, or downstream evidence separate; never replace them with one composite fidelity score.
Validation and fallback
Keep failed cases visible and verify manifest version, fixture identity, budgets, settings, and denominators. Estimated tokens must be labeled estimates. If provider telemetry or blind downstream scoring is unavailable, mark it Pending; do not infer superiority from local fixtures.
Example
Benchmark this context workflow against the fixed manifest. Report efficiency and protected-fact recall separately, retain failed cases, and label provider-token measurements Pending.From the suite directory, run python scripts/tikaz_context.py benchmark --manifest benchmarks/manifest.json --output <directory>. For retrieval, run python scripts/tikaz_context.py benchmark-retrieval --manifest benchmarks/retrieval-manifest.json --output <directory>. Inspect both summary.json and cases.json; a passing case is not evidence of positive savings, semantic equivalence, or universal retrieval accuracy.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

