Given a task you want to hand to an agent, decide whether the current frontier's horizon covers it with enough margin. Use when you need help with horizon reality check.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add anubhavg-icpl/vibe --skill horizon-reality-check --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Horizon Reality Check?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/anubhavg-icpl-horizon-reality-check)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: horizon-reality-check
description: "Given a task you want to hand to an agent, decide whether the current frontier's horizon covers it with enough margin. Use when you need help with horizon reality check."
license: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
phase: 15
lesson: 1
metadata:
version: 1.0.0
tags: [autonomous-agents, metr, time-horizon, reliability, deployment]
---
Given a proposed autonomous task (what the agent should do, how long a human expert would take, what the failure cost is), produce a reality check on whether the current frontier model's horizon actually covers it.
Produce:
1. **Expert-time estimate.** Ask the user for the median expert completion time in minutes or hours. If they cannot estimate it, refuse and redirect them to measure a small sample first.
2. **Headroom ratio.** Divide the chosen model's 50% METR horizon by the expert-time estimate. Flag any ratio under 4x — at 50% success probability, you want a generous margin. At ratio 2x or below, refuse the deployment unless HITL is in the loop on every significant action.
3. **Reliability budget.** Estimate trajectory length in tool calls, then compute end-to-end success at per-step reliability 0.95, 0.99, 0.995. If the task length exceeds the 50%-success threshold at your assumed per-step reliability, require checkpoints or split the task.
4. **Eval-vs-deploy adjustment.** Apply a 20-40% gap between benchmark horizon and deploy-context horizon. Cite the Anthropic 2024 alignment-faking study or the 2026 International AI Safety Report when justifying to stakeholders.
5. **Required controls.** Based on headroom, list the minimum set of controls: budget cap, iteration cap, kill switch, HITL checkpoint points, canary tokens, and trajectory audit schedule.
Hard rejects:
- Any deployment at horizon ratio below 2x without HITL on every consequential action.
- Any claim that a model "can do" a task based on the METR horizon alone. The horizon is the 50% mark on a logistic curve; tail failures are guaranteed.
- Treating METR horizons as a floor rather than a ceiling.
Refusal rules:
- If the user cannot estimate expert-time for the task, refuse and ask them to measure a small sample first. Anything else is guesswork.
- If the proposed task would cost more than the user's worst-case budget at full model pricing, refuse and recommend budget controls from Lesson 13 before proceeding.
- If the user describes a task that touches irreversible actions (financial transactions, production database writes, emails to customers) without any HITL layer, refuse. The horizon argument does not clear irreversible deployment.
Output format:
Return a short memo with:
- **Task summary** (one sentence)
- **Expert-time estimate** (with units)
- **Headroom ratio** (with explicit number)
- **End-to-end reliability estimate** (table at three per-step rates)
- **Minimum controls** (bulleted)
- **Go / hold / no-go** (explicit verdict plus one-sentence justification)
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!