paths-filter

Conditionally run actions based on files modified by PR, feature branch or pushed commits

Runssource: GitHubTypeScriptMITcommit ceb8a2b8f2d8

TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: change detection, ci cd, conditional execution and github actions.

paths-filter runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 1.7 minutes and hit 1 error and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.

All 78 tests pass, TypeScript compiles cleanly, and npm pack produces the dist artifact.

What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured

Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 100 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).

At a glance

verdict
Runs
Argusic Score
100 / 100
cost of the verifying run
$0.01 (measured)
recorded runs
1
last tested
stars
3,348
forks
387
open issues
36
watchers
11
size
2 MB
created
last push

Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.

What was measured

From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.

What went wrong, in the agent's own words

The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.

  • npm EBADENGINE warning: package requires node >= 24 but container has v18.19.1
Install time
2 minutes
Cold machine to finish
3 minutes
Errors hit and fixed
1 hit, 1 fixed with no human help
How the result was proved
npm test exited 0, 78 passed across 6 test suites
Model tokens used
19,827
Exact commit tested
ceb8a2b8f2d8
Container image
sha256:cdd920bce783

What was not measured

The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.

Peak GPU memory
this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
Behaviour over a long run
each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load

The end of the recording

The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.

npm notice unpacked size: 1.5 MB
npm notice shasum:        794e02bdec2b914e0e912ba1a101be4ed96771aa
npm notice integrity:     sha512-6TME43ELQggfO[...]IDyss974sM+Gg==
npm notice total files:   32
npm notice
paths-filter-1.0.0.tgz
exec
/bin/sh -lc "echo '{\"install_succeeded\": true, \"launch_succeeded\": true, \"install_minutes\": 1…
 succeeded in 0ms:
{"install_succeeded": true, "launch_succeeded": true, "install_minutes": 1.0, "errors": [{"msg": "n…
tokens used
19,827

Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.

How it was tested

One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.

Strengths and limits

Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.

What went well

  • Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
  • Installed in 1.7 minutes.
  • Recovered from all 1 error without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
  • Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
  • Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.

What did not, or is not known

  • Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.

What it is a reasonable choice for

  • Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
  • A quick evaluation: it was running 1.7 minutes after the clone.

Run history

tested byattemptoutcomescorecost USDwhen
Argusic Runner1/3Runs100.000.01

Topics (from GitHub)

change-detectionci-cdconditional-executiongithub-actions

Embed the badge

Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.

[![Tested by Argusic](https://argusic.com/badge/paths-filter.svg)](https://argusic.com/subject/paths-filter)

Questions

Does paths-filter run?
Yes. paths-filter runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 2 minutes, hitting 1 error on the way, and recorded the session.
How did Argusic test paths-filter?
On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit ceb8a2b8f2d8. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
What did it cost to test paths-filter?
The run that produced this verdict cost $0.01: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
How long does paths-filter take to install?
1.7 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
Does paths-filter need a GPU?
Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
What goes wrong when installing paths-filter?
1 thing broke in the recorded run, and 1 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
Where is the evidence for paths-filter?
The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.

Discussion