Step 3.5 flash
A lower-table result with a few useful bright spots: 21/151 tasks solved at least once, 8/151 solved in all three attempts, with the clearest wins around automation and configuration-management work plus Go product plumbing across configuration, storage, and service APIs. 这是一个排名靠后但仍有局部亮点的结果：151 题中至少一次解出 21 题，三次都解出 8 题；强项主要落在自动化和配置管理类改动以及横跨配置、存储和服务 API 的 Go 产品工程。
How to read this result可以这样读
- Step 3.5 flash is best read as volatile explorer: rank #31, 21 reached tasks, 8 stable solves.Step 3.5 flash 更适合读成探索型但波动较大：排名 #31，触达 21 题，稳定解出 8 题。
- Best suite signal: Ansible · release 003 at 4/10 (40.0%).最强 suite 信号：Ansible 自动化 · release 003，4/10（40.0%）。
- Weakest visible area: vuls · release 011 at 0/10 (0.0%).最弱可见区域：vuls 漏洞扫描器 · release 011，0/10（0.0%）。
- Because the agent shell is OpenCode, the result mostly exposes the underlying model's planning habits rather than a heavily opinionated workflow.因为 agent shell 是 OpenCode，这个结果更直接暴露底层模型的规划习惯，而不是强工作流包装后的表现。
Step 3.5 flash is a volatile explorer row around the #31 slot. The useful reading is not just the 17.04 score, but the split between 21 reached tasks and 8 stable solves.
The closest family reference is Step 3.7 flash at rank #18. Compared with that row, this one is 10.97 points behind, with 22 fewer reached tasks and 10 fewer stable solves.
The volume win is Ansible · release 003 at 4/10 (40.0%), while the cleanest pass-rate spike is vuls · release 012 at 2/4 (50.0%). The warning label is vuls · release 011 at 0/10 (0.0%), so the contrast is not generic strength versus weakness; it is automation and configuration-management work holding together better than localized Go security-scanner changes on this run. Because the agent shell is OpenCode, the result mostly exposes the underlying model’s planning habits rather than a heavily opinionated workflow.
At this end of the table, the weak bars are more informative than the wins. They show which task families break first when the model-agent loop runs out of reliable planning.
At this rank, Redis cache backend cannot connect to TLS-enabled Redis servers without additional configuration options matters as much as the wins. It shows the task shape where the model-agent loop fails before it can produce a meaningful verifier-backed patch.
The audit trims 3 solved attempts from Step 3.5 flash but still keeps 93% of the solved set, so the suite shape remains useful even where individual wins are debatable.
The available audit keeps 39 of 42 initial solved attempts. Read this as a robustness check, especially when the audit sample is smaller than 453 attempts.当前可用复核保留了 42 次初始成功中的 39 次。这更适合作为稳健性检查，特别是在复核样本小于 453 次尝试时。
This row is more useful as a failure map than as a default choice. Look at vuls · release 011 at 0/10 (0.0%) first: it shows the task shape where the loop loses traction. With 42/453 solved attempts, the page is most useful for seeing where the agent loop breaks before it becomes a dependable option.
Supporting suite table
| Suite | Repo | Solved | Pass^3 | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
release-zh-012-future-architect-vuls |
future-architect/vuls | 2/4 | 2 | 50.0% |
release-zh-003-ansible-ansible |
ansible/ansible | 4/10 | 1 | 40.0% |
release-zh-004-ansible-ansible |
ansible/ansible | 1/3 | 0 | 33.3% |
release-zh-007-flipt-io-flipt |
flipt-io/flipt | 3/10 | 1 | 30.0% |
release-zh-010-future-architect-vuls |
future-architect/vuls | 3/10 | 1 | 30.0% |
release-zh-001-ansible-ansible |
ansible/ansible | 2/10 | 1 | 20.0% |
release-zh-011-future-architect-vuls |
future-architect/vuls | 0/10 | 0 | 0.0% |
release-zh-014-internetarchive-openlibrary |
internetarchive/openlibrary | 0/10 | 0 | 0.0% |
release-zh-015-internetarchive-openlibrary |
internetarchive/openlibrary | 0/10 | 0 | 0.0% |
release-zh-018-qutebrowser-qutebrowser |
qutebrowser/qutebrowser | 0/9 | 0 | 0.0% |
Step 3.5 flash 是一个排名 #31 附近的探索型但波动较大结果。它的重点不只是 17.04 分，而是 21 道触达题和 8 道稳定题之间的差距。
最接近的同系参照是排名 #18 的 Step 3.7 flash。和它相比，这一行最终分低 10.97 分，触达题少 22 个，稳定题少 10 个。
从数量看，主要胜利来自Ansible 自动化 · release 003，4/10（40.0%）；从通过率看，最干净的高点是vuls 漏洞扫描器 · release 012，2/4（50.0%）。需要警惕的是vuls 漏洞扫描器 · release 011，0/10（0.0%），所以这里不是泛泛地说强弱项，而是自动化和配置管理类改动在这次运行中比边界相对清楚的 Go 漏洞扫描器改动更能闭环。因为 agent shell 是 OpenCode，这个结果更直接暴露底层模型的规划习惯，而不是强工作流包装后的表现。
在榜单后段，低柱子往往比胜利更有信息量。它们说明模型-agent 循环在哪些任务家族上最先失去可靠规划。
在这个排名段，Redis 缓存后端缺少额外配置选项，无法连接启用 TLS 的 Redis 服务器 和成功案例一样重要。它说明模型-agent 循环在哪种任务形态上还没形成有效 verifier-backed patch。
复核从 Step 3.5 flash 中剔除了 3 次成功，但仍保留 93% 的成功集合，因此即便个别胜利有争议，suite 形状仍然有参考价值。
The available audit keeps 39 of 42 initial solved attempts. Read this as a robustness check, especially when the audit sample is smaller than 453 attempts.当前可用复核保留了 42 次初始成功中的 39 次。这更适合作为稳健性检查，特别是在复核样本小于 453 次尝试时。
这一行更适合作为失败地图，而不是默认选择。先看vuls 漏洞扫描器 · release 011，0/10（0.0%）：它展示了模型-agent 循环最容易失去抓手的任务形态。在 453 次尝试中只成功 42 次时，这页最有价值的是看 agent loop 在哪里先断掉。
支撑这个判断的 suite 表
| Suite | Repo | 解出 | Pass^3 | 通过率 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
release-zh-012-future-architect-vuls |
future-architect/vuls | 2/4 | 2 | 50.0% |
release-zh-003-ansible-ansible |
ansible/ansible | 4/10 | 1 | 40.0% |
release-zh-004-ansible-ansible |
ansible/ansible | 1/3 | 0 | 33.3% |
release-zh-007-flipt-io-flipt |
flipt-io/flipt | 3/10 | 1 | 30.0% |
release-zh-010-future-architect-vuls |
future-architect/vuls | 3/10 | 1 | 30.0% |
release-zh-001-ansible-ansible |
ansible/ansible | 2/10 | 1 | 20.0% |
release-zh-011-future-architect-vuls |
future-architect/vuls | 0/10 | 0 | 0.0% |
release-zh-014-internetarchive-openlibrary |
internetarchive/openlibrary | 0/10 | 0 | 0.0% |
release-zh-015-internetarchive-openlibrary |
internetarchive/openlibrary | 0/10 | 0 | 0.0% |
release-zh-018-qutebrowser-qutebrowser |
qutebrowser/qutebrowser | 0/9 | 0 | 0.0% |