Run step

Step 16: tool results

2026-11-14 19:36:44 UTC · previous step · next step

evaluate_argument

Input

{
  "verdict": "likely",
  "decisive": false,
  "evaluation": "Granting that the company figures are accurate and that code and agent-hours make up much of the labour of AI R&D, a large and fast-growing AI share follows on a volume reading. The argument lives on the reliability of self-reported, unaudited metrics from two labs and on the unstated premise that output volume tracks share of R&D, which the opposing argument disputes.",
  "argument_id": "5b8a781f-0e9c-43e6-8e84-2b55bfd6825b"
}

{"success":true,"message":"Evaluation recorded for argument \"The argument from company-reported automation metrics\": likely."}

evaluate_argument

Input

{
  "verdict": "slight",
  "decisive": false,
  "evaluation": "Granting that research judgment remains human and that acceleration is modest, it follows that output metrics overstate AI's contribution to progress, but not that AI's share of the work is small or not growing. The argument tempers the claim on a contribution-weighted reading rather than refuting it on the plain reading.",
  "argument_id": "f69b6c3e-02da-4ab6-8476-611de086a79a"
}

{"success":true,"message":"Evaluation recorded for argument \"The argument that humans still supply the research judgment\": slight."}

set_claim_importance

Input

{
  "claim_id": "a3a7a95b-f3fb-4cf8-a605-cbe3bee834db",
  "reasoning": "Central input to recursive self-improvement forecasts; empirical core is fairly agreed on volume metrics but its interpretation is actively disputed.",
  "importance": 0.6,
  "contestation": 0.45
}

{"success":true,"message":"Importance of claim a3a7a95b-f3fb-4cf8-a605-cbe3bee834db set to 0.6. Contestation recorded as 0.45."}