bvandeusenandClaude Fable 5
64bfa5725f
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 7s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 25s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m3s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 20s
`retrieval_logs` was write-only. `record_retrieval` inserted rows and nothing in the tree ever selected from them: the only `select()` over RetrievalLog lived in a test. So #1038's gate — "build the reranker once telemetry shows precision is the bottleneck" — was unsatisfiable by construction, and the one real tuning decision on record (the 0.68 write-path threshold, #2223) had to be reached by hand-probing the live instance with eight payloads. This adds the half that was missing. `retrieval_summary(user_id, days=30)` returns two aggregates side by side, each read from the table built for it — NOT a join. NoteUsageEvent's docstring is explicit that the two are complements ("RetrievalLog tunes the threshold, this tunes the corpus") and that RetrievalLog's JSONB `result_ids` cannot be indexed at the per-note grain, so correlating through it would be both slower and less honest than reading each source directly. That corrects the approach sketched on the task. - `sources`, per surface: calls, zero_result_calls, cleared_threshold (how often the best hit beat the threshold in force for THAT call), the top_score spread as p10/p50/p90/min/max, avg_result_count, p90 duration. Zero-result calls are counted apart from low-scoring ones — they are a different failure and averaging them together would hide both. - `usage`, from note_usage_events: ranked surfacings, ambient surfacings, and pulls split into `pulled_by_agent` / `pulled_by_human`. That split is not decoration. NoteUsageEvent's own comment says the mcp_/rest_ prefix is load-bearing and names #1038 while saying so: "is this dead weight?" is answered by any pull, "was that injected line useful?" only by an agent pull. `pull_through` exists to answer the second, so it counts agent pulls over ranked surfacings; both halves ship so the first stays answerable. Two things the code made me get right rather than guess: - Distinct-note counts get their own queries. `count(distinct note_id)` per (event, source) group cannot be summed across groups — a note surfaced by two sources is one distinct note and would be counted twice. A wrong number labelled "distinct" is worse than no number. - No CASE in the GROUP BY. #2663 is the bug where a second case() rendered its own expanding bind names, Postgres rejected the query, a broad except swallowed it, and every counter read zero in production while mocked tests passed. Grouping on raw `source` and classifying in Python cannot fail that way. For the same reason the readout distinguishes `read_failed` from an empty window, and its tests are integration against real Postgres — percentile_cont ... WITHIN GROUP only proves it parses against a database. Exposed as the `retrieval_telemetry` MCP tool, added to `_READ_ONLY_TOOLS`: it mutates nothing, but its name carries no read prefix, so the completeness test cannot derive it and it would otherwise have failed closed for read-only keys in silence — the same reason `enter_project` is spelled out there. Docs updated to name both exceptions rather than leave the rule looking derivable. Scoped to the caller's own telemetry: a retrieval log records what one user's agent asked for, query text included, and is not a shared record kind — the owner filter is the whole access rule, not a shortcut past access.py. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>