adchurch
Joined 5 years ago
Joined 5 years ago
Fair enough but what exactly were you thinking when you said:
> I would like to see this (and any model router, frankly) benchmarked against two things
And thanks for sharing about failure cases! Those do sound like strange harness-level things, honestly we haven't seen failure cases like that crop up in our own usage & testing.
Also I’m very interested in the unique failure cases you’re referring to! What have you noticed?
I’d argue it’s similar to looking at the Meta algorithm for serving ads and asking “what about astra” - it could come up with an answer but it’s not the right model for the task.
Yes for both! We have some logic to put providers on cooldowns and/or deprioritize them.
OpenRouter isn't strictly necessary but it does make it easier to not have to set up accounts/API keys with several different providers to get started.
The latter is an interesting question! In practice because the session continues, we can see it's going down the wrong path and escalate. Basically no decision we make when routing is entirely unsalvageable (but we do have a performance penalty for every incorrect decision we make so of course we try to avoid it).
Conceptually very similar to Cursor's auto mode. The key distinctions are:
- We plug into any harness (e.g. Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, Pi)
- We aren't incentivized to route to our own model, we're incentivized to route to the best model whatever it may be
Email: [email protected]