№ 0938GitHub
Muse Glimmer DeepSearchQA skill eval
You.com's harness for evaluating Muse Glimmer 30B on DeepSearchQA with You.com MCP tools inside pi sessions. A custom RLM v5 extension reached F1 0.8054 on 50 tasks (0.6910 over 900x3) versus 0.50 for plain skill injection.
DeepSearchQA Skill Eval Template
A harness for evaluating chat models on google/deepsearchqa: pi sessions run You.com
MCP tools, and answers are graded with the official DeepSearchQA rater.
The harness is intentionally thin. The agent is a stock pi session loading the upstream@youdotcom-oss/pi extension; its bundledyou-web skill is passed directly into the system prompt, and read is withheld so the
model cannot open the answer key in data/prompts.jsonl.
What we found
Three scaffold generations were evaluated against a fixed local-weight root
(meta/muse-glimmer-30b via OpenRouter) on the same 50-task K=1 samples (and two full
900-task × 3-trial runs):
| configuration | F1 (raw) | FC pass | notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| RLM v5 custom extension | 0.8054 / 0.6910 (900×3) | 64% / 52.8% | best recorded; hand-built distillation |
Raw MCP port (8a7588d) |
0.6647 | 60% | no extension |
@youdotcom-oss/pi, all tools |
0.5421 | 44% | read on (unsafe config) |
@youdotcom-oss/pi, skill injected |
0.5000 | 46% | read off |
@youdotcom-oss/pi, you-search + you-contents |
0.4788 | 40% | two tools only |
@hicaru/pi-rlm scaffold |
0.0 | 0% | failed experiment |
| RLM v6 / v7 / v8 | 0.7390 / 0.7054 / 0.2626 | deeper sub-model autonomy degrades |
Full history, configs, and paired analysis: docs/experiment-log.md.
Limits identified
The remaining constraints are structural, not tuning knobs:
- The model, not the tools, is the ceiling. Adding tools, skills, budget, or deeper
scaffold autonomy moved the 50-task score within run-to-run noise (±0.05) or worse. The
root over-searches (500–650 calls on the two-tool run) and under-synthesises. - Skills are weak leverage here. pi surfaces a skill only when a file-reading tool is
active — and that tool is an eval-integrity hole (it can read the expected answers).
Passing the skill body directly into the prompt is the only safe mechanism, and it did
not move the score. - MCP content is not the bottleneck. Raw, truncated, highlighted, distilled, and
full-page reads all land in the same band once synthesis is the limiting step. - More autonomy hurts this root. The monotonic v6→v8 slide and the pi-rlm failures show
that handing a local-weight model more recursiv







