feat: add local provider comparison report - #28
Merged
Conversation
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
--comparison-reportfor deterministic and optional-provider evaluation pathsLLM_PROVIDER=nonefallback path end to endnullwhen no provider call succeedsLearning-path fit
This closes Week 5's local measurement loop while keeping CI deterministic, offline, and cost-free. Configured provider calls remain explicit and opt-in.
Testing
python -m pytest -q(36 passed)python -m ruff check app cli evals testsLLM_PROVIDER=none python -m evals.run_evals --comparison-reportFollow-up
A live-provider comparison remains intentionally opt-in because it makes one provider call per evaluation fixture. Week 6 expands the corpus; Week 8 adds controlled provider-versus-private-endpoint benchmarking.