# External agent packages and returned results
Generated: 2026-11-13T08:01:23.478Z
Source build: local
Canonical docs: https://teammately.ai/docs
---
id: workflow.cli.external-agent-packages
title: External agent packages and returned results
summary: Keep a coding agent’s task context, local implementation, and returned benchmark results connected.
kind: task
product_area: developer_tools
status: stable
updated: 2026-11-11
canonical: /docs/cli/external-agent-packages
---
# External agent packages and returned results
Keep a coding agent’s task context, local implementation, and returned benchmark results connected.
## Prerequisites
A copied External Agents task, repository access, and the authentication setup supplied with the task.
## Steps
1. Connect the read-only product MCP for the pinned project, benchmark, criteria, and optional reference Run.
2. Inspect the actual application repository and confirm what candidate the reference Run represents.
3. Use the CLI’s supported external-output submission workflow for customer-executed behavior. Choose managed Harness execution deliberately when it fits the assignment.
4. Return actual candidate identity and results. Inspect resulting Runs and comparisons through ordinary Benchmark Evaluations.
## Object and state changes
Copying a task creates text, not a hosted agent Session or transcript. Product MCP retrieves context; CLI submission creates ordinary Run records through its supported contract.
## Success criteria
The returned assessment identifies the actual candidate and pinned benchmark context without claiming private agent work that was never returned.
## Common failure modes
Assuming Harness upload is mandatory; including credentials in copied task text; confusing Docs MCP retrieval with product submission.
## Related reference pages
{% related-card-grid title="Continue this workflow" %}
- [Work with External Agents](/docs/improve/external-agents)
{% /related-card-grid %}
## Related troubleshooting pages
{% related-card-grid title="Resolve a problem" %}
- [Permissions troubleshooting](/docs/troubleshooting/permissions)
- [Benchmark run troubleshooting](/docs/troubleshooting/benchmark-runs)
{% /related-card-grid %}
---
id: improve.work-evolve
title: Work with External Agents
summary: Copy a benchmark-scoped task for your coding agent to implement and evaluate in your real application repository.
kind: task
product_area: improve
status: stable
updated: 2026-10-30
canonical: /docs/improve/external-agents
---
# Work with External Agents
External Agents gives your coding agent a concrete improvement task grounded in the selected Benchmark Version. The agent works in your real repository; Teammately supplies the applicable Cases, Policies, Rubrics and recorded results.
## Prerequisites
- A selectable Benchmark Version.
- Access to the application repository and authorization for the intended changes.
- A coding agent connected through the setup supplied with the task.
- An optional reference Run that genuinely represents the application starting point.
## Steps
1. Open **Harness improvement → External Agents**.
2. Select the Benchmark Version. Changing it clears local criterion and reference-Run selections.
3. Focus on the whole Benchmark or choose up to 20 approved and applicable Policy and Rubric Versions.
4. Optionally select one individual reference Run. No Run is silently selected.
5. Choose the allowed improvement direction: supported practices, prompt only, model only, the same model family, or model configuration only.
6. Copy the task, including setup instructions when needed, into your coding-agent conversation.
7. Have the agent inspect the actual repository, retrieve the pinned criteria and Run context, implement the change and evaluate it.
8. Inspect resulting Runs through ordinary Benchmark Evaluations.
The copied task includes the Project Agent Brief when present. Credentials do not belong in that text.
## Execution choices
A Teammately Harness and source upload are optional. Customer-executed responses are the default path for the agent's real application. Managed Harness execution requires a deliberate choice.
The product data MCP supplies read-only context, instructions, results and comparisons. The CLI owns local files and submission operations. The documentation MCP only retrieves these manuals.
Start with [CLI authentication](/docs/cli/authentication) and [product MCP setup](/docs/cli/mcp), then follow [external output submission](/docs/cli/external-outputs) or the optional [managed Harness workflow](/docs/cli/managed-harness).
## Object and state changes
The composer keeps selections locally and copies text. It creates no hosted agent Session, transcript, durable handoff object, automatic code adoption or Harness activation. Later submitted responses or managed execution create their own ordinary Run records.
## Success criteria
- The task preserves the intended Benchmark Version and criteria.
- A selected reference Run is checked against actual code.
- Implementation and comparison use actual pre-change and post-change behavior.
- Accepted responses and candidate identity remain attributable.
## Common failure modes
- Stopping after tool setup or context retrieval.
- Assuming a Harness upload is mandatory.
- Treating copied text as an executed Session.
- Using a reference Run from unrelated code.
- Claiming private agent work before returned artifacts or results exist.
## Related reference pages
{% related-card-grid title="Related reference pages" %}
- [Harness Improvement](/docs/improve)
- [Import External Evaluation Outputs](/docs/benchmark-evaluations/output-mapping)
- [Evaluation Results](/docs/benchmark-evaluations/results)
- [Project Context](/docs/agent-setup/project-context)
{% /related-card-grid %}
## Related troubleshooting pages
{% related-card-grid title="Related troubleshooting pages" %}
- [Output mapping troubleshooting](/docs/troubleshooting/output-mapping)
- [Permissions troubleshooting](/docs/troubleshooting/permissions)
{% /related-card-grid %}
---
id: troubleshooting.permissions
title: Permissions troubleshooting
summary: Separate Project membership from Expert Contribution assignment and readiness when an expert has no tasks available.
kind: error
product_area: troubleshooting
status: stable
updated: 2026-11-06
canonical: /docs/troubleshooting/permissions
---
# Permissions troubleshooting
Use this when project role, reviewer assignment, or approval ownership prevents someone from completing the intended work.
## Symptom
A user can access Teammately but cannot open the expected Project, or an expert reports **no tasks available** after opening their Contribution link. These symptoms belong to different owning surfaces.
## Likely causes
- The user lacks the required Project permission through a direct grant, workspace group, or workspace role.
- The Contribution was requested for a different recipient.
- The Contribution exists but its next Task or Checkpoint is not ready.
- The current IP is blocked before Project membership is evaluated.
## Diagnostic checks
- Check direct grants in **Project Settings → Project Members**, the user's workspace-group membership, and the group's permission for the intended Project. Absence from the direct member list alone does not establish lack of access. Inspect workspace status and role in **Admin → Directory → Members** as well.
- Open the Contribution from the sender-side Expert Contributions workspace and verify its recipient and status.
- Check whether the expert has an executable Task or Checkpoint, not merely whether the Contribution exists.
- If **Access Restricted** is visible, resolve the IP allowlist first.
## Fix
- Add the correct individual workspace user under **Project Settings → Project Members** when direct Project membership is missing.
- If access is intended through a workspace group, confirm both the user's membership in that group and its permission for the intended Project.
- Correct the Contribution recipient through the owning Contribution workflow when the request went to the wrong person.
- Resolve lifecycle or readiness problems in Expert Contributions when access succeeds but no Task can be entered.
- Do not infer a permission from a role label or edit governed artifacts merely to make a control appear.
## Prevention
- Separate reviewer access from approval authority in review setup.
- Check assignments before launching a review session.
- Use a small pilot Contribution before assigning a larger specialist cohort.
- Keep project membership changes visible to review owners.
## Related task pages
{% related-card-grid title="Related task pages" %}
- [Request an Expert Contribution](/docs/expert-contributions/request-contribution)
- [Expert Contributions](/docs/expert-contributions)
- [Complete an Expert Contribution](/docs/expert-contributions/complete-contribution)
{% /related-card-grid %}
## Related reference pages
{% related-card-grid title="Related reference pages" %}
- [Permissions](/docs/reference/permissions)
- [Roles and Permissions](/docs/governance/roles-and-permissions)
- [Expert Contributions](/docs/expert-contributions)
{% /related-card-grid %}
---
id: troubleshooting.benchmark-runs
title: Benchmark run troubleshooting
summary: Diagnose a Run that cannot start, has no usable outputs, or produces results that cannot be compared safely.
kind: error
product_area: troubleshooting
status: stable
updated: 2026-11-06
canonical: /docs/troubleshooting/benchmark-runs
---
# Benchmark run troubleshooting
## Symptoms
- The evaluation surface has no Benchmark Version to run.
- Output import or mapping cannot identify a Case or output column.
- A Run is created but remains empty, incomplete, or failed.
- Results appear under the wrong candidate label or Harness Version.
- Two Runs show a score change but do not share a comparable snapshot boundary.
## Likely causes
- No immutable Snapshot exists for the intended evaluation set.
- Imported outputs are mapped to the wrong Case or column.
- The saved Harness Version or candidate metadata does not match the evaluated system.
- The Run is partial, failed, or being compared across different Benchmark Versions.
## Check the boundary before the failure
1. Confirm the URL and page identify the intended Project, Benchmark, and Benchmark Version.
2. Open the Version or Snapshot and verify it contains the expected Cases and evaluators. If it does not, repair coverage and create a new Snapshot; do not edit the historical Run.
3. For managed execution, confirm the saved Harness Version and recorded settings. For imported results, confirm that the external candidate context describes the system that produced the submitted responses.
4. If importing outputs, inspect the mapping preview. Match the Case identifier and candidate-output column deliberately; do not use a reference-output column as candidate behavior.
5. Open Run detail and inspect status, Case count, errors, metadata, and per-Case results before trusting aggregates.
## Fix
- **No runnable version:** finish Case selection and create a Snapshot first.
- **Missing imported outputs:** append only missing Cases to an uncompleted Trial using the exact manifest IDs. Correcting an accepted response or adding Cases after completion requires a new Trial in the external Run or a new Run. Preserve the original results.
- **Wrong Harness or metadata:** create a correctly configured Run. Do not relabel completed results to represent a different system.
- **Partial managed failure:** inspect and preserve the existing Run's recorded outcomes. For another independent execution under unchanged conditions, use **Run again**. **Run evaluation** reopens matching work, including failed work. Publish a new Harness Version when its code changes, or create a new Snapshot and Benchmark Version when Case content or criteria change.
- **Confusing comparison:** compare the Benchmark Version, Harness Version, candidate metadata, and evaluator boundary. Qualify or avoid the comparison when more than the intended variable changed.
## Prevention
Create a Snapshot before evaluation. For managed execution, save the exact Harness Version. For imported results, preserve external candidate context and preview the mapping on representative Cases. Before comparing, confirm that every difference between the two Runs is intentional and visible.
## Recovery check
Open the recovered Run and sample several Case results. Confirm the displayed input, candidate output, reference output where present, applicable Rubrics, and metadata all belong together. A completed status alone does not prove correct mapping.
{% example-demo title="Example: scores drop after output import" %}
A team imports a new candidate file and sees a sudden score collapse. Run detail shows that the column containing reference outputs was mapped as candidate output. The operator creates a new Run, maps the actual candidate column, preserves the mistaken Run as an identifiable failed attempt, and compares only the corrected Run with the prior candidate under the same Benchmark Version.
{% /example-demo %}
## Related task pages
{% related-card-grid title="Related workflows" %}
- [Run a Benchmark Evaluation](/docs/benchmark-evaluations/run-evaluation)
- [Import External Evaluation Outputs](/docs/benchmark-evaluations/output-mapping)
- [Inspect Evaluation Results](/docs/benchmark-evaluations/inspect-results)
- [Evaluation Results](/docs/benchmark-evaluations/results)
- [Run Details and Metadata](/docs/benchmark-evaluations/run-details)
{% /related-card-grid %}
## Related reference pages
{% related-card-grid title="Related reference" %}
- [Benchmarks and versions](/docs/concepts/benchmarks-and-versions)
- [Benchmark snapshots](/docs/coverage-engineering/benchmark-snapshots)
- [Outputs](/docs/object-model/outputs)
{% /related-card-grid %}