Harness Trace v2.1

Agentic Execution Loop & Verification Trace Inspector

Harness Engine
Laguna S 2.1
Poolside (pool)
Research Budget
44m
71% total trace
Impl + Verification
18m
29% total trace
Playwright Pass
Verified
12/12 Assertions
Step 1/6
TIME ALLOCATION BUDGET Research: 44m | Synthesis: 10m | Verification: 8m
Research
Synthesis
Playwright Verification
Retry / Loop Warning
Click node to isolate step
Phase: Research
Read codebase and dependency specs
Completed
Duration: 1200s (20m)
Tool Calls: 14 calls
Browser / Diagnostic Output:
Initialized tree parser. Evaluated dependency hierarchy across local DGX Spark instance. Zero syntax violations detected.
Harness Hyperparameters
Trace Diagnostic Report

Trace validated: Long-horizon research allocation (44m) allowed state machine verification on step 6 to pass without infinite retry loops.

Agent Execution Traces and Verification Loops

How does phase budgeting between research, code synthesis, and browser verification affect autonomous agent loop stability?

This interactive inspector visualizes execution traces for autonomous coding agents broken into research, synthesis, and verification phases. In multi-step software tasks, allocating time upfront to parse repositories and define invariants helps prevent unconstrained retry loops during test runs. When a verification step fails, trace graphs track whether the harness executes a targeted patch or enters repeated failure loops.

The presets and durations (such as 44m research vs 18m implementation) are illustrative hardcoded fixtures rather than telemetry captured from live model runs. In this interface, clicking 'Recalculate Diagnostic Rollout' only updates the research duration metric from the input field; it does not simulate dynamic token generation, harness temperature changes, or live Playwright assertions.

Try a worked example

Select the 'High-Entropy Verification Failure Trace' preset in the Harness Preset dropdown. Observe that the top metrics bar switches Playwright Pass from Verified to 'Unverified', the status note updates to 'Max Retries Exceeded', and the Research Budget drops to 5m while Impl + Verification rises to 40m. Scrubbing to Step 4 reveals an uncorrected canvas reset failure where repeated retries exhausted the execution budget.

Phased Agent Execution

Autonomous coding loops typically divide long-horizon development into discovery (reading dependencies and codebase layout), generation (writing logic and state machines), and verification (executing unit tests or browser-level checks). Explicitly tracking duration and tool-call volume by phase exposes bottlenecks before deployments.

Self-Correction vs. Retry Exhaustion

When an end-to-end browser check fails an assertion, an agent can inspect diagnostic logs to synthesize a scoped diff. If the error signal lacks sufficient context or the model's research context is depleted, the agent risks entering cyclic retry patterns until retry caps terminate execution.

Stored traces and allocation labels are separate evidence

Read the explanation

The Laguna preset header declares forty four research minutes and eighteen implementation minutes, totaling sixty two. Its six step durations sum to four thousand three hundred twenty seconds, or seventy two minutes. The research steps do total forty four minutes, but the other four add twenty eight, not eighteen. The page displays stored labels; it does not reconcile these totals or measure an actual runtime. The verified flag and twelve-assertion message are fixtures, not test evidence. The allocation graphic divides the two header fields. Forty four over sixty two rounds to seventy one percent research. The remaining twenty nine percent is split sixty percent to synthesis and forty percent to verification, yielding seventeen point four and eleven point six. These segments do not use the step durations. The source does not prove that research prevented retries or improved outcomes; it visualizes one authored narrative. Setting the research parameter to ten and recomputing changes only the research duration field and header allocation. The six stored steps, their durations, original total field and verified flag remain unchanged. The handler uses integer parsing with a fallback of forty five, so zero also becomes forty five. Scrubbing replays fixture details and exporting preserves the current object; neither executes tools, provider calls or Playwright tests. No backend was used for this explanation.

Super generates helpful tools and automates fact-checking across the internet proactively. If you enjoyed this tool, build your own with Super and share it with a friend.