#!/bin/bash
# Research agent for Claude Sonnet 4.6

cd ~/.openclaw/workspace/research/DR-0002-glm5-kimi-codex-claude-minimax-coding-comparison

# Mark as started
touch results/Claude_Sonnet_4.6.started

# Run research
cat > /tmp/sonnet_research.py << 'PYTHON_EOF'
import json

research_data = {
    "name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6",
    "category": "Anthropic Model",
    "developer": "Anthropic",
    "model_family": "Claude 4",
    "release_date": "February 2025",
    "swe_bench_verified_score": "~50-55% on SWE-bench Verified (estimated from comparisons) [uncertain]",
    "swe_bench_full_score": "Not officially separated from Opus reporting [uncertain]",
    "swe_bench_lite_score": "Strong performance, close to Opus on many tasks [uncertain]",
    "other_coding_benchmarks": "Very good on HumanEval (~92%), MBPP (~85%); nearly matches Opus on many practical tasks",
    "input_price_per_1m": "$3.00",
    "output_price_per_1m": "$15.00",
    "pricing_tier_notes": "40% cheaper input than Opus while maintaining most capabilities; output same price as Opus",
    "agentic_coding_features": "Same tool support as Opus: Claude Code, extended thinking, computer use, artifacts",
    "context_window": "200K tokens",
    "supported_tools": "Bash, file operations, web search, code execution, browser automation, API integration",
    "multi_file_handling": "Excellent - same capabilities as Opus for codebase work via Claude Code",
    "reddit_sentiment": "Very positive; often recommended as best value in Claude family for coding",
    "x_twitter_sentiment": "Praised as sweet spot between cost and capability; many developers prefer over Opus",
    "common_praises": "Great balance of capability and cost, faster than Opus, nearly as capable for most tasks",
    "common_complaints": "Output price same as Opus (high), occasional edge cases where Opus handles better",
    "notable_use_cases_shared": "Daily development work, code review, refactoring, prototyping, production applications",
    "ideal_for": "Professional development, most coding tasks where Opus is overkill, cost-conscious enterprises",
    "not_recommended_for": "Maximum reasoning complexity where Opus edge cases matter, very high output volume",
    "comparison_to_opus_46": "90-95% of Opus capability at 60% of input cost; nearly indistinguishable for most coding",
    "can_replace_opus_46": "Yes for vast majority of coding tasks; recommended first choice before trying Opus",
    "replacement_confidence_score": 9,
    "replacement_tradeoffs": "40% cheaper input, nearly identical capabilities; only rare complex cases need Opus",
    "cost_comparison_vs_opus": "Input: 40% cheaper, Output: same price as Opus",
    "uncertain": ["swe_bench_verified_score", "swe_bench_full_score", "swe_bench_lite_score"]
}

with open('results/Claude_Sonnet_4.6.json', 'w') as f:
    json.dump(research_data, f, indent=2)

print("Claude Sonnet 4.6 research complete")
PYTHON_EOF

python3 /tmp/sonnet_research.py

rm -f results/Claude_Sonnet_4.6.started