benchflow-traj-upload-ops
Skill363 starsChanged 6 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Operate, test, troubleshoot, and explain `bench traj upload` for public or trusted-direct trajectory contributions, including interactive and fully specified commands, dry runs, input validation, local secret masking, trajectory reports and previews, manifest metadata, upload progress, idempotency, and production promotion checks. Use this skill when a maintainer or operator wants to test, inspect, or debug a trajectory upload; validate a trajectory, report, or manifest; or verify the public upload path end to end. For helping a contributor submit their own session, use `benchflow-traj-upload` instead.
In this repository9 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- benchflow-experiment-reviewSkill
- benchflowSkill
- benchflow-traj-uploadSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- task-creatorSkill
- task-reviewSkill
- thermo-nuclear-code-quality-reviewSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 8
Use the public contribution route for ordinary users.
- Distinctive: line 11
Read references/cli-contract.md before explaining non-default modes, troubleshooting a failure, reviewing a generated manifest, or claiming …
- Distinctive: line 18
Use the released CLI when validating the published user experience:
- Distinctive: line 25
Use the repository checkout when validating unreleased PR behavior:
- Very specific: line 32
Do not substitute the installed bench binary for uv run bench while testing unreleased code.
- Distinctive: line 38
Prefer the guided flow when a person wants to inspect and confirm the capture:
- Distinctive: line 48
Use the fully specified form for scripts or an intentional no-prompt upload:
- Distinctive: line 61
Use a dry run before a real upload when testing new files or CLI changes:
- Distinctive: line 75
Verify these invariants in the rendered report:
- Very specific: line 83
Every detected secret value is replaced locally with <XXX-benchflow-key-values-XXX>.
≈ “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
Operate BenchFlow trajectory uploads
Use the public contribution route for ordinary users. Treat --direct as a
trusted-operator escape hatch, not as an equivalent public-path test.
Read references/cli-contract.md before explaining non-default modes, troubleshooting a failure, reviewing a generated manifest, or claiming an end-to-end production result. The reference is the complete behavior contract for the current CLI.
Choose the matching CLI build
Use the released CLI when validating the published user experience:
uv tool install --python 3.12 --upgrade benchflow
bench traj uploadUse the repository checkout when validating unreleased PR behavior:
uv sync --extra dev --locked
uv run bench traj uploadDo not substitute the installed bench binary for uv run bench while testing
unreleased code. Record bench --version or the exact Git SHA so the tested
artifact is unambiguous.
Run the requested flow
Prefer the guided flow when a person wants to inspect and confirm the capture:
bench traj uploadThe CLI asks for the path, renders a report from a locally redacted staging
copy, asks for missing GitHub and email metadata (after trying gh / git
inference), and defaults the upload confirmation to No.
Use the fully specified form for scripts or an intentional no-prompt upload:
bench traj upload <PATH> --github-id <GITHUB_ID> --email <EMAIL>Providing all three required inputs makes the command non-interactive: it still
renders the report, then uploads without a confirmation prompt. If any one is
missing, the session is interactive and asks only for missing values before a
final confirmation. Identity that resolves through gh / git inference also
skips the confirmation; without a TTY, unresolved identity fails with the
one-line --github-id / --email fallback instead of hanging on a prompt.
Use a dry run before a real upload when testing new files or CLI changes:
bench traj upload <PATH> \
--github-id <GITHUB_ID> \
--email <EMAIL> \
--dry-runA dry run validates, redacts, reports, and creates the temporary manifest, but never prompts for confirmation and never makes a network request.
Inspect before uploading
Verify these invariants in the rendered report:
Total steps = Thinking steps + Tool-call steps + Human steps.- Human steps are real user messages. Tool results, status or metadata records,
empty records, and invented placeholders such as
Assistant responseare not trajectory steps. - Each preview row shows up to the first 100 words of a meaningful, already
redacted step.
--preview-stepsaccepts 0 through 20 and defaults to 5. - Every detected secret value is replaced locally with
<XXX-benchflow-key-values-XXX>. Valid JSONL containing secrets is accepted after masking; the original source files remain unchanged. - File count, byte size, creation time, primary file, format, step counts, masked-value count, and preview are plausible for the selected capture.
Verify the result at the right boundary
For a dry run, report only local validation. For a real public upload, verify
that the trusted validator promoted the digest to
sources/community/<digest>/, with manifest.json present last and bound to
the uploaded artifacts. A client success message or quarantine write alone is
not production end-to-end proof.
Report whether the capture was uploaded, cancelled, already present, rejected, or only dry-run validated. Never expose contributor email, detected secret values, signed upload URLs, credentials, or internal service endpoints.
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.

