bulk-reply-save

Bulk reply save

When a turn ends with N similar files to persist (e.g., 25 persona-respondent reply files into one directory), do not emit N Write tool_use blocks. The faster pattern is one JSON manifest + one Bash invocation of a Python helper.

When the subagent-Write pattern is even better

If the subagent has Write in its tools list (e.g., persona-respondent from v0.1.7 onward), prefer the SAVE_REPLY_TO <abs-path> directive in the dispatch prompt over this skill's manifest pattern. Each subagent writes its own reply file in parallel inside its own context, so the heavy reply content never flows through the dispatcher's output stream at all.

The manifest pattern in this skill still requires the dispatcher to retranscribe N reply texts as output tokens into the JSON literal. For long replies (e.g., 1 KB Korean self-images), that is the wall-clock bottleneck — not the per-Write tool overhead. SAVE_REPLY_TO eliminates the retranscription entirely.

This skill remains the right choice when:

• The subagent doesn't have Write (lighter agent contracts).
• You're persisting N files produced by your own logic, not by subagents (e.g., post-processing transforms applied per-key).
• The dispatch returns one batched response with multiple items that you must fan back out per-key.
• The reply content is short (≤30 chars per item) — the retranscription cost is trivial and the manifest is a useful audit artifact.

Why per-file Writes are slow at scale

Even when N Write tool calls are issued in parallel within one assistant response, each is a separate tool-call invocation with framework overhead. The wall-clock pattern is closer to serialized than truly concurrent. For N=25 selfimage files, this can add ~10s of overhead that contributes nothing to the actual file I/O (which would take <100ms total in a tight Python loop).

The bulk pattern collapses that to:

• 1 Write tool call (the JSON manifest, ~5–20 KB)
• 1 Bash tool call (Python loop writing N files at OS speed)

The pattern

Step 1: Construct a JSON manifest

Build a JSON object mapping a stable key (usually uuid8 for persona-respondent work) to the reply content:

{
  "077756dd": "저는 기본적으로 사람을 좋아하고…",
  "09e26797": "저는 논리적으로 생각하는 편이고…",
  ...
}

Step 2: One Write tool call

Write the manifest to disk alongside the run directory:

Write({
  file_path: "G:/temp/nemotron/runs/<ts>/_save_manifest.json",
  content: <json text, UTF-8, ensure_ascii=false>
})

Step 3: One Bash tool call to a save helper

For the nemotron project, use scripts/bigfive_selfimage_save_replies.py:

PYTHONIOENCODING=utf-8 .venv/Scripts/python.exe scripts/bigfive_selfimage_save_replies.py \
    <target_dir> <manifest.json>

The helper:

1. Loads the JSON.
2. Iterates {key: content}.
3. Writes each as <target_dir>/persona_<key>.txt.

Total: 2 tool calls vs N. For N=100, that's a ~50× reduction in tool-call overhead.

When NOT to use this

• N < 3: per-file Write calls are fine — no point setting up the manifest.
• Files have heterogeneous content shapes or different target dirs: the manifest assumes uniform <target>/persona_<key>.txt naming. Heterogeneous → per-file Writes are clearer.
• Per-file processing logic is needed before write (e.g., reformat each reply differently): bulk pattern doesn't help. Use Python to process + write in the same Bash call.

Example: 25 Pass 1 self-image saves

Anti-pattern (slow):

Write({file_path: "…/pass1_selfimages/persona_aaa.txt", content: "저는 …"})
Write({file_path: "…/pass1_selfimages/persona_bbb.txt", content: "저는 …"})
… × 25 …

Pattern (fast):

Write({
  file_path: "runs/<ts>/_save_manifest.json",
  content: '{"aaa": "저는 …", "bbb": "저는 …", …}'
})
Bash({
  command: "python scripts/bigfive_selfimage_save_replies.py runs/<ts>/pass1_selfimages runs/<ts>/_save_manifest.json"
})

After the Bash call confirms the count, delete the manifest if you don't want it as an audit artifact:

rm runs/<ts>/_save_manifest.json

Variants for new projects

If working in a project that doesn't have bigfive_selfimage_save_replies.py, the helper is ~15 lines — copy this template to scripts/save_replies_batch.py once per project:

"""Read a JSON manifest of {key: content}, write each as <target>/persona_<key>.txt."""
from __future__ import annotations
import json, sys
from pathlib import Path


def main(argv: list[str]) -> int:
    sys.stdout.reconfigure(encoding="utf-8")
    target = Path(argv[1])
    target.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
    manifest = json.loads(Path(argv[2]).read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
    for key, content in manifest.items():
        (target / f"persona_{key}.txt").write_text(content, encoding="utf-8")
    print(f"wrote {len(manifest)} files to {target}")
    return 0


if __name__ == "__main__":
    sys.exit(main(sys.argv))

Adapt the filename pattern (persona_<key>.txt) if your project uses a different scheme.

Bonus: Pass 2 Likert replies

The same pattern works for Pass 2 saves. Manifest entries are 12-digit strings:

{
  "077756dd": "1\n4\n2\n5\n1\n1\n2\n4\n1\n2\n4\n3",
  "09e26797": "5\n4\n3\n2\n3\n4\n2\n2\n4\n3\n2\n5",
  …
}

Target dir: pass2_replies/. Helper script doesn't care what's in the content — it just writes.