Skip to content

chore(benchmarks): removed custom scorers#711

Closed
james-rl wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
james/rm-custom-scorers
Closed

chore(benchmarks): removed custom scorers#711
james-rl wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
james/rm-custom-scorers

Conversation

@james-rl

@james-rl james-rl commented Feb 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

User description

⚠️ PR Title Must Follow Conventional Commits

Format: feat[optional scope]: <description>

Examples: feat: add new SDK method · feat(storage): support file uploads · feat!: breaking API change


Description

Removed custom scorers feature since it was unused.

Motivation

Users are advised to use bash scorers or python scorers instead.

Changes

Testing

  • Unit tests added
  • Integration tests added
  • Smoke Tests added/updated
  • Tested locally

Breaking Changes

Checklist

  • PR title follows Conventional Commits format (feat: or feat(scope):)
  • Documentation updated (if needed)
  • Breaking changes documented (if applicable)

CodeAnt-AI Description

Remove custom scorer validation and support for custom scorer type

What Changed

  • The scorer "validate" API, its request/response types, and the SDK validate method were removed; callers can no longer run a validation endpoint for a scorer.
  • The "custom_scorer" scoring function type and related parameters were removed from the ScoringFunction definitions; only bash, command, python, and test-based scorers remain.
  • Examples, SDK docs, and tests were updated to remove references to custom scorers and validation; listing, creation, retrieval, and update of scorers remain supported.

Impact

✅ No scorer validation endpoint available
✅ Cannot register or use "custom_scorer" scoring type
✅ SDK examples and tests no longer reference scorer validation

💡 Usage Guide

Checking Your Pull Request

Every time you make a pull request, our system automatically looks through it. We check for security issues, mistakes in how you're setting up your infrastructure, and common code problems. We do this to make sure your changes are solid and won't cause any trouble later.

Talking to CodeAnt AI

Got a question or need a hand with something in your pull request? You can easily get in touch with CodeAnt AI right here. Just type the following in a comment on your pull request, and replace "Your question here" with whatever you want to ask:

@codeant-ai ask: Your question here

This lets you have a chat with CodeAnt AI about your pull request, making it easier to understand and improve your code.

Example

@codeant-ai ask: Can you suggest a safer alternative to storing this secret?

Preserve Org Learnings with CodeAnt

You can record team preferences so CodeAnt AI applies them in future reviews. Reply directly to the specific CodeAnt AI suggestion (in the same thread) and replace "Your feedback here" with your input:

@codeant-ai: Your feedback here

This helps CodeAnt AI learn and adapt to your team's coding style and standards.

Example

@codeant-ai: Do not flag unused imports.

Retrigger review

Ask CodeAnt AI to review the PR again, by typing:

@codeant-ai: review

Check Your Repository Health

To analyze the health of your code repository, visit our dashboard at https://app.codeant.ai. This tool helps you identify potential issues and areas for improvement in your codebase, ensuring your repository maintains high standards of code health.

@codeant-ai

codeant-ai Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

CodeAnt AI is reviewing your PR.


Thanks for using CodeAnt! 🎉

We're free for open-source projects. if you're enjoying it, help us grow by sharing.

Share on X ·
Reddit ·
LinkedIn

@codeant-ai codeant-ai Bot added the size:XS This PR changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files label Feb 5, 2026
@codeant-ai

codeant-ai Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Nitpicks 🔍

🔒 No security issues identified
⚡ Recommended areas for review

  • Exposed removed feature
    The PR description says "removed custom scorers", but the SDK still exposes ScorerOps and Scorer across the public API (RunloopSDK property, exported types, and factory methods). That will confuse users and keep an unsupported code path reachable. Verify whether scorers should be fully removed, deprecated, or blocked at runtime.

  • Backwards compatibility risk
    The code still exports Scorer and re-exports it from the SDK namespace. If the feature is removed server-side, leaving client creation/listing in place may surface confusing runtime errors for existing callers. Decide whether to add a runtime guard/deprecation or fully remove the surface.

  • Test Coverage Reduction
    The PR removes the validate-related tests and mock behavior for scorer validation. Confirm this removal was intentional and that the production Scorer implementation no longer relies on a .validate method or endpoints. If any code still expects validate to exist, tests will now miss regressions and runtime code could break.

  • Documentation mismatch
    Some JSDoc comments still refer to "custom" scorers and ScorerOps in examples. Since custom scorers feature was removed, verify that docs, examples and cross-references remain accurate and do not suggest removed functionality or references that don't exist.

  • Loose Mock Typing
    mockClient is declared as any, which can mask client API shape mismatches in tests. Mistyped calls or incorrect mock signatures may not be caught by the test suite. Consider narrowing the mock's shape or using jest helpers to better reflect the real API surface to catch regressions early.

@codeant-ai

codeant-ai Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

CodeAnt AI finished reviewing your PR.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

⚠️ Object Smoke Tests & Coverage Report

Test Results

✅ All smoke tests passed

Coverage Results

Metric Coverage Required Status
Functions 97.97% 100%
Lines 86.63% - ℹ️
Branches 65.75% - ℹ️
Statements 85.32% - ℹ️

Coverage Requirement: 100% function coverage (all public methods must be called in smoke tests)

⚠️ Some object methods are not covered in smoke tests. Please add tests that call all public methods.

View detailed coverage report
File Functions Lines Branches
src/sdk.ts ❌ 96.15% 81.41% 70.83%
src/sdk/agent.ts ✅ 100% 100% 100%
src/sdk/blueprint.ts ✅ 100% 100% 80%
src/sdk/devbox.ts ✅ 100% 91.81% 96.96%
src/sdk/execution-result.ts ✅ 100% 92.68% 70.83%
src/sdk/execution.ts ✅ 100% 94.11% 83.33%
src/sdk/gateway-config.ts ✅ 100% 100% 100%
src/sdk/network-policy.ts ✅ 100% 100% 100%
src/sdk/scenario-run.ts ❌ 92.85% 75% 50%
src/sdk/scenario.ts ❌ 85.71% 91.66% 100%
src/sdk/scorer.ts ✅ 100% 100% 100%
src/sdk/snapshot.ts ✅ 100% 100% 100%
src/sdk/storage-object.ts ✅ 100% 80% 48.93%

📋 View workflow run

@james-rl
james-rl requested review from dines-rl and ross-rl February 5, 2026 02:00
@james-rl
james-rl marked this pull request as draft February 5, 2026 02:11
@james-rl

james-rl commented Mar 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

This got done as part of a separate PR. Closing

@james-rl james-rl closed this Mar 2, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

size:XS This PR changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant