# The routing trajectory, and the number that is missing

**06-08-2026. V-464.** Not a new measurement. This collates the figures already recorded
in `docs/evals/` and CLAUDE.md, and names one measurement that has not been taken. Dated
because the conclusion expires the moment the missing number is measured.

## The question

126 of the 1023 commits between 03-07-2026 and 06-08-2026 touch `internal/router`. Is the
routing between the core functions and his speech getting better?

## The trajectory

RU routing fixture, classifier plus the ONNX embedder, no LLM arm in any of these runs.

| date | change | fixture | source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02-08-2026 | classifier re-measured | 68.8% of 77 | CLAUDE.md |
| 04-08-2026 | V-498, rest-of-day and narrative rules | 58/82, 70.7% | CLAUDE.md |
| 06-08-2026 | V-626 baseline | 64/91, 70.3% | `2026-08-06-seeds-to-prompt-boundary.md` |
| 06-08-2026 | V-626, seeds onto the prompt boundary | 66/91, 72.5% | same |
| 06-08-2026 | V-627, alarm verbs reach stage 0 | 69/91, 75.8% | `2026-08-06-alarm-verbs-reach-stage-0.md` |
| 06-08-2026 | V-633, Russian acts reach tools | 69/91, unchanged | `2026-08-06-russian-acts-reach-tools.md` |

The fixture grew from 77 to 82 to 91 cases across this window. So the percentages are
comparable and the counts are not.

## Accuracy moved late

It sat near 70% for a month. V-626 and V-627 landed the same day and took the
deterministic path from 64/91 to 69/91. That is the first real accuracy movement since the
stage-0 rules went in.

## Most of the work was reach, not accuracy

Praxis went 0/12 to 11/12 and lifecycle 0/5 to 5/5 (V-516,
`2026-08-05-praxis-reach.md`). No Russian utterance could reach a tool before V-633. That
one landed at 69/91 unchanged, because the fixture holds no case for it. Alarm verbs,
ordinal selection, spoken corrections and the claimant ladder share the shape.

So the fixture undercounts the month. Things that were structurally unreachable now reach,
and a fixture that never asked about them cannot show it. Judge reach against
`make eval-reach` and the ecosystem fixture, not against the routing one.

## The missing number

On 05-08-2026 the cascade with the resident model scored 69/91, 75.8% full, 80.2%
intent-only, at p50 1.19s (`2026-08-05-routing-resident-model.md`).

On 06-08-2026 the classifier and stage 0 alone reached 69/91, 75.8% full, at p50 22.9ms.

Those are the same full-accuracy score. The cascade has not been re-measured since V-626
and V-627 landed. Both are stage-0 changes, and stage 0 runs inside the cascade, so the
cascade should have gained from them too.

One of two things is true, and nothing on the box says which:

- The cascade gained as well, the model still separates from the floor on intent-only, and
  it earns its place.
- The deterministic floor has caught up on this fixture, and the resident model is costing
  1.17 seconds a turn for nothing measurable.

Take that measurement before planning more routing work. It needs a second llama-server on
a fixed host port, because the resident one binds `--port 0` inside the container.

## What this does not settle

Intent-only is the more honest comparison for the model arm. The model routes `reminder`
and leaves the time to the daemon, which is what the contract asks. The 05-08 run puts it
at 80.2% through the cascade and 61.5% for the model alone. There is no 06-08 intent-only
figure for the deterministic path to set beside those.