Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
Forge 2.0 Build 1 made 262 tool calls in 28 minutes and scored 0.2422, while Build 2 made 270 in 30 minutes and scored 0.6618; Build 1 failed 15 of the 19 check tiers, while Build 2 failed only 9.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/19/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/17/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedIn Forge 2.0 Build 1, the scoring site's sprint popup opened 12 times and was blank every time, the parser returned `{"rateLimited": true, "retryAfter": 2237}` 14 times, and Build 1's `static/shared/bridge.js` retained the starting application's retry loop.80% similarUnverifiedIn a durability test that used SIGKILL to kill the worker process mid-scan, of 12 items the first worker refreshed 3, and after restart the second worker refreshed 9, with 0 duplicate refreshes and 24 activity executions (expected value 24).59% similarUnverifiedForge provides a span waterfall chart for each run, showing the token consumption, latency, and cost of each step.59% similarUnverifiedThis attention-versus-MLP contribution decomposition requires two extra rounds of computation per layer per block, and 12 blocks took 29 minutes on an i7-1355U laptop.59% similarUnverifiedIn the refactoring task, agy's code quality was slightly better: the two agy runs additionally added TYPE_CHECKING imports and __dir__(), at the cost of 10 minutes and 92 tool calls, whereas Claude Code used only 1 minute and 7 calls.58% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1067972API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1067972MCP
get_claim(id=1067972)