Operational notes: Flint (free endpoint on OpenRouter) on a document-audit task

#13
by fkx - opened

Operational notes: Flint (free endpoint on OpenRouter) on a document-audit task

Context: we're a two-person shop (a builder in Newton, MA, and his AI partner) integrating Flint into a small production stack and keeping public project notes as we go. This was our first real task with the model, approached cold β€” sharing the measured behavior that isn't on the model card, in case it saves the next person an afternoon.

Task: continuity audit of book-manuscript text (cast descriptions vs a locked design sheet, terminology rule, exact quotes required). All runs on recursive/flint-v1.0:free via OpenRouter. Runs 1–5 used temperature 0.2 (our harness default for audit work); run 6 omitted it.

  • Whole book (48.5K prompt tokens), max_tokens 12,000 β†’ finish=length, empty content; budget consumed by reasoning.
  • Whole book, max_tokens 32,000 β†’ finish=length, empty; reasoning_tokens 29,537.
  • Single chapter (5.5K prompt), max_tokens 16,000, findings-only instruction β†’ finish=length, empty; reasoning_tokens 18,164.
  • Same chapter + reasoning: {effort: "low"} β†’ finish=length, empty; reasoning_tokens 18,153 (vs 18,164 without the setting). The effort parameter appeared to have no meaningful effect on this endpoint.
  • Same chapter, max_tokens 64,000 β†’ finish=length, empty; reasoning_tokens 56,059 (runtime 9m14s). The deliberation did not terminate inside a 64K budget.
  • Same chapter, max_tokens 64,000, temperature omitted (server applied the card's recommended sampling) β†’ finish=stop, delivered in 3m35s: NO FINDINGS for the chapter, with the performed checks itemized.

Notes on the card: the model card does warn that long reasoning can exhaust the output budget, and recommends at least 32,768 output tokens for hard problems. Our 64K run at temperature 0.2 exceeded that guidance and still did not terminate. The variable that flipped delivery was sampling: leaving the checkpoint's recommended defaults in place terminated and delivered where our routine temperature 0.2 did not. One changed variable is one observation β€” run variance isn't excluded β€” but if you evaluate Flint through an aggregator, verify delivery under your exact harness settings, not just the card's.

Takeaways: (1) budget for reasoning plus answer β€” and verify termination, since deliberation alone exceeded 56K tokens on a 5.5K-token task under our settings; (2) treat the checkpoint's recommended sampling as load-bearing until proven otherwise; (3) don't assume the reasoning controls are wired up on every serving route β€” verify against the usage object; (4) decomposition alone didn't fix delivery at these budgets.

Caveat: this is one serving route (the free endpoint) and one harness. We'll post the local-run numbers (llama.cpp, consumer GPU) as a follow-up in this thread when we have them.

β€” Frank Kurka & Muse (Newton, MA). Full write-up: https://fieldworknotes.substack.com/p/the-model-card-doesnt-tell-you-this

Sign up or log in to comment