LLM-PQR

Test your models. Pick with evidence.

LLM-PQR is a small, provider-neutral tool for choosing among your models. You declare each model's measured quality, latency, token prices, capabilities, and whether it is local. Then you choose how much you value cost, speed, and quality. LLM-PQR produces an explainable recommendation without calling a provider or handling credentials.

Status: alpha. The first release is a deterministic selection core and CLI, not an autonomous router or a universal benchmark.

Why

Model choice is contextual. A low-cost local model may be ideal for private transformations; a stronger hosted model may be worthwhile for complex work. LLM-PQR keeps that decision in user-controlled data rather than hard-coding vendor tiers or marketing labels.

Real-world reference

A private Hermes Agent policy-routing pilot explores the same bounded-routing questions LLM-PQR answers: hard local-only constraints, capability floors, monotonic rewrites, and content-free route logging. The pilot is independent of this package; LLM-PQR does not import, link, or run it, and the document makes no production or benchmark claims. See PQR continuity for the consumer boundary: selecting a model must not silently alter an agent's context, memory, identity, or tools.

Quick start

python -m pip install llm-pqr
llm-pqr init --output models.json
llm-pqr choose \
  --config models.json \
  --input-tokens 1200 \
  --output-tokens 300

Make the first result useful

init intentionally creates placeholders: LLM-PQR never guesses a provider, model, price, or quality score for you. Replace the generated candidate with one model you already use and values you have measured or verified. For example:

{
  "priorities": {"cost": 8, "latency": 6, "quality": 7},
  "models": [
    {
      "id": "my-local-model",
      "provider": "my-local-runtime",
      "model": "my-model-name",
      "local": true,
      "quality": 0.72,
      "latency_ms": 850,
      "input_cost_per_million": 0,
      "output_cost_per_million": 0,
      "capabilities": ["text", "json"]
    }
  ]
}

Then re-run llm-pqr choose with your expected input and output token counts. The numbers above are an editable example, not a ranking or a claim about any model. See Giving useful feedback if a constraint, capability label, or output was missing for your setup.

The checked-in example is a real bounded smoke run, not a placeholder:

llm-pqr choose \
  --config examples/models.json \
  --input-tokens 1200 \
  --output-tokens 300

The source run used the synthetic routing-v1 corpus on an Apple M1 Max MBP. examples/measured-smoke-20260814.json contains 24 sanitized normalized rows plus the run ID, corpus and private-source artifact hashes, sample counts, rubric pass rates, and median wall-clock latency. The checked-in rows let anyone audit the published aggregate with:

python examples/verify_measured_smoke.py

The raw source artifact is not published because it contains model responses and command envelopes; its hash is a provenance binding, not a claim that the private artifact is independently retrievable. Usage and cost remain null because the adapter emitted no machine-readable usage. Each candidate has only five or six valid responses, below the corpus's minimum-N gate, so this is bounded integration evidence—not a model ranking.

With cost disabled because it was unmeasured, and latency/quality weighted 4/6, the example selects sol:

{
  "estimated_cost_usd": null,
  "score": 0.60335,
  "selected": {
    "id": "sol",
    "local": false,
    "model": "gpt-5.6-sol",
    "provider": "openai-codex"
  }
}

Add --local-only and every hosted candidate becomes ineligible rather than receiving a lower privacy score. The measured local candidate is selected:

llm-pqr choose --config examples/models.json --local-only

{
  "excluded": {
    "luna": "not local",
    "sol": "not local",
    "terra": "not local"
  },
  "selected": {
    "id": "local-qwen",
    "local": true,
    "model": "qwen3.6-35b-a3b-local",
    "provider": "local-qwen"
  }
}

Avoid a provider pool that is temporarily unavailable

LLM-PQR never calls a provider or reads credentials. If your application already knows that a provider is in a rate-limit or quota cooldown, pass that provider ID as a hard availability constraint before routing:

from llm_pqr import Request

request = Request(
    unavailable_providers=frozenset({"openai-codex"}),
)
decision = router.choose(request)

Candidates from an unavailable provider are excluded before weighted scoring, with the explanation provider unavailable. This prevents a known-cooling-down provider from winning only to fail at request time. Your integration remains responsible for discovering, expiring, and clearing provider health state.

The values in examples/models.json are measured from one bounded smoke run, not universal rankings. Use the checked-in sanitized rows to verify the published aggregate, then replace it with measurements and verified prices for your workload.

Create a fresh editable configuration with:

llm-pqr init --output models.json

Require a capability when needed:

llm-pqr choose --config models.json --require tools

Summarize content-free route telemetry before or alongside a full evaluation:

llm-pqr summarize tests/fixtures/pre-llm-pqr-evals.jsonl \
  --taxonomy tests/fixtures/pre-llm-pqr-taxonomy.json

The summarizer accepts only route, reason, latency_ms, and outcome. It also requires a trusted, explicit allowlist of route and reason values. Unknown values—including encoded text and identifier-shaped tokens—are rejected rather than copied into output. Prompts, responses, identifiers, paths, and every unexpected field are rejected. Latency percentiles cover every accepted outcome, including failed, interrupted, and policy-blocked attempts, so operational tail latency is not success-biased.

The command returns JSON containing the selected model, excluded candidates, a score, the estimated cost (when rates are supplied), and normalized priority weights.

User-controlled configuration

llm-pqr init creates an editable JSON file:

{
  "priorities": {"cost": 0.35, "latency": 0.25, "quality": 0.40},
  "models": [
    {
      "id": "local-model",
      "provider": "your-local-runtime",
      "model": "replace-me",
      "local": true,
      "quality": 0.65,
      "latency_ms": 900,
      "input_cost_per_million": 0,
      "output_cost_per_million": 0,
      "capabilities": ["text"]
    }
  ]
}

Fields

• id, provider, model: your labels. No provider is special-cased.
• local: a technical locality declaration. --local-only excludes every model not marked local.
• quality: a 0–1 score from your benchmark or evaluation. LLM-PQR does not invent it.
• latency_ms: your measured latency estimate.
• input_cost_per_million, output_cost_per_million: USD token rates you have verified. Omit either if unknown; LLM-PQR reports cost as unknown rather than fabricating it.
• capabilities: user-defined labels such as text, tools, vision, or json.
• priorities: non-negative relative weights. They are normalized automatically, so 8/1/1 is equivalent to 0.8/0.1/0.1.

Decision model

1. Apply hard requirements first: local_only and required capabilities.
2. Normalize the remaining candidates' declared cost, latency, and quality values.
3. Choose the highest weighted score and explain the result.

Privacy is a constraint, not a score: a non-local candidate cannot win a --local-only request. See Privacy Is a Constraint, Not a Score for the design rationale.

Important limits

• This release does not call providers, send prompts, store credentials, or measure models automatically.
• A local: true declaration is user-supplied metadata, not a network-attested guarantee. Production integrations must verify resolved endpoints are local before handling private content.
• Scores and recommendations are conditional on your workloads, model versions, settings, hardware, and measurements. They are not universal rankings.
• Token counts are not cost. Use current model-specific input/output rates and record their source/date in your workflow.

Development

uv run --with pytest --with ruff pytest
uv run --with ruff ruff check src tests
uv run --with ruff ruff format --check src tests

See CONTRIBUTING.md, ROADMAP.md, SECURITY.md, CHANGELOG.md, and the prepared launch notes.

Feedback

If you tried LLM-PQR, please open a feedback issue with one model constraint, capability, or recommendation that did not fit your setup. Reports about missing constraints are especially useful; do not include API keys, private prompts, customer data, or internal endpoints.

Project and attribution

LLM-PQR was created by Dov Ginsburg and is maintained by Amazed Labs. The canonical project is Amazed-Labs/llm-pqr.

If you use, modify, or redistribute LLM-PQR, please preserve the copyright and license notice required by the MIT License. For academic or published work, the repository includes a CITATION.cff file with the preferred citation.

License

MIT. Copyright © 2026 AMAZED Labs. See LICENSE.