What it learns from
Outcome history, and nothing else. When an agent finishes a task, SenseLab records which memories were involved and how the work turned out. That pairing — what the agent knew, and what happened next — is the entire training signal. It accumulates quietly in the background while your agents do their jobs.Sharper recall
Retrieval starts out blending a few generic signals — how closely a memory matches the question, how recent it is, how much confidence it carries — in fixed proportions. Sensible defaults, but the same ones every account begins with. They can’t know that in your account recency counts for more than confidence, or that the memories confirmed by real outcomes are the ones that consistently pay off. So SenseLab learns that from your history instead. Memories that were in play before work succeeded become examples of useful. Memories that preceded failures, or that nothing has ever validated, become examples of not useful. A model picks up the patterns that separate the two, weighing things like how confident a memory is, how old it is, how many outcomes have confirmed it, whether it’s a stated fact or a working hypothesis, and whether it’s genuine knowledge or just a stored working file. Once it has learned something, that judgement joins retrieval alongside the generic signals, and briefings and recalls start putting your proven memories first. Your agents don’t do anything differently — they ask the same questions and get better answers.Better-calibrated trust
Every memory carries a confidence score: how much trust it has earned. Outcomes move it. Work that succeeds nudges the memories behind it up; work that fails pulls them down, and further than a single success lifts them, because trust should be easy to lose and slow to rebuild.
How much each outcome should count, though, depends on what you do. A critical
failure in a payments service doesn’t mean what one in a logging service means.
So SenseLab measures it. It looks at what became of the memories behind each kind
of outcome — whether they kept turning up in failures, or went on to support work
that succeeded — and works out the adjustments that fit your own history. It also
estimates how long memories in your account stay useful before they’re better
treated as stale.
This is measurement, not silent surgery. SenseLab reports what your history
suggests — on Pro Tools → Calibration and through
amfs_calibrate — and the
standard evidence model keeps applying unless
someone deliberately changes it. Confidence scores never shift under you because
a model decided they should.Training better agents
This is the part that compounds. A decision trace is already shaped like training data: here is what the agent knew, here is what it decided, here is how it turned out. Context, action, result. That shape is exactly what fine-tuning wants, and producing it is normally the expensive part — someone has to sit down and label thousands of examples. Your agents generate it as a by-product of working, and the outcome is the label. Nothing has to be ranked by hand. From that history SenseLab can produce datasets in the shapes the training ecosystem expects: examples of decisions that worked, pairs contrasting a success against a failure so a model can learn preference, and memories scored by how their outcomes turned out so a model can learn to judge quality on its own. Those feed the standard tools — OpenAI’s fine-tuning API, Hugging Face, TRL — and what comes out the other side is a model that has internalised what your organisation already learned the hard way. You do not have to run that training yourself. Managed Models watches for the point where an agent has enough outcome-labelled decisions, runs the fine-tune, scores the candidate against a holdout of your own history, and serves it behind one model string. The tuned model’s runs are recorded like any other, so the next tune starts from a better baseline — the slow loop feeding itself. Export the datasets directly from Pro Tools → Training Data Export, or withamfs_export_training_data.
