Interesting to see the tool-use failure mode (rewriting files from scratch instead of using edit tools) as a primary cancellation reason. In my own small-model experiments, I've found that models often default to "generate the whole thing" because it's the most statistically safe continuation — partial edits require the model to attend to and preserve existing context, which is harder than regenerating from scratch.

For GRM-3.6, if you're exploring tool-use reliability, one cheap diagnostic: measure the ratio of "full-file rewrite" vs "targeted edit" actions across a fixed set of code-editing prompts, and track how that ratio changes with training. It can reveal whether the model learned the tool schema but not the preference for minimal edits.

Good luck with the 35B-A3B flagship! 🤗

Rewriting a file from scratch seems worth tracking separately from whether the tests pass: it can also remove comments or behavior outside the requested change. That makes the contrast with 3.2-Sky useful for understanding the cancellation. In the comparisons you inspected, did 3.4 still favor full rewrites when both models had the same editing tools and system prompt?