Probaboracle

Probably a mini oracle. Definitely a mini chatbot.

Choose what, when, why or where. Probaboracle offers a small, vague answer in return. The interaction gives it very little information to work with, while asking it to keep a recognisable sentence shape and voice.

How it works

The research CLI validates the selected question type, then passes a compact routing prompt and output contract to one generation node. The model produces the line. Evaluation follows the response as a separate operation.

Diagram

One question type, one generated line

One question type, one generated line
The documented research generation path keeps the question type and output contract explicit.
Open full-size diagram
Read the diagram

The selected prompt type passes through configuration validation and a minimal routing prompt. That routing prompt and the oracle output contract enter one Agents SDK generation node, which produces the final line.

One verdict became several questions

The earliest product-fit gate asked whether a line felt like Probaboracle. That judgment contained several different questions. Did the sentence hold together? Did it answer the selected kind of question? Did it have the right voice? Could an unexpected answer still be worth keeping?

Later beta work examined coherence first, then question relevance and coherent absurdity. That made room to observe an answer that missed its selected question type while still having a coherent, interesting shape.

A recorded Beta 4.1 example reads:

probably a curve that hints at a shape without ever becoming one.

The research note records it as a passing what example. The wording and the judgment belong to that historical evaluation.

A pass can leave another question open

One why correction produced 81 passes in an 81-row rerun. The notes still identified a problem: 66 responses received the same “good useless reason” note, and the result had narrowed into one dominant passing shape.

That leaves a more useful question than the pass count alone: how can a correction remove a recurring weakness while preserving variety?

Sources & further reading