Research before verdictLimits stay adjacent
Use the evidence. Keep the uncertainty.
The research desk turns current provider terms and attributed external evidence into answerable buyer questions. It does not turn a source summary into a firsthand review.
Current repository-coding research
Costs you can reproduce. Outcomes still to measure.
Four model profiles, one focused comparison, one buyer guide, and a proposed original test.
Repository-coding workflow costs
Token baskets, caching, long-context charges, and excluded costs.
Open the analysis →Buyer guideWhich model is enough?
A low-cost starting choice with an evidence-based escalation rule.
Read the guide →ComparisonLuna vs Terra
What a 10× rate premium does—and does not—prove.
Compare →Next evidenceProposed repository test
Five tasks and the acceptance record needed for a real verdict.
Inspect protocol →Publication boundary
A research profile may summarize current identity, price, access, limits, and attributed external results. A firsthand verdict requires fixed tasks, exact configurations, complete attempts, acceptance artifacts, and review/correction evidence. The current repository-coding cluster reports zero original model tests.
Update triggers
- Provider price, access, alias, lifecycle, context, caching, or tool changes.
- A benchmark version, harness, fallback, or task-set change.
- New matched repository outcomes with complete costs and human effort.
- A substantiated factual correction.
Read the editorial standards and testing method before treating any page as a recommendation.