# recall 0.5.1

Released 17 Oct 2026 · [Compare on GitHub](https://github.com/alirng/recall/compare/v0.5.0...v0.5.1) · [recall-agents 0.5.1 on PyPI](https://pypi.org/project/recall-agents/0.5.1/)

## Added

- **Benchmark figures live in one store.** Every figure in the README, `docs/benchmarks.md` and on rererecall.com, and every other system's figure they compare against, is a row of `docs/benchmarks/results.jsonl`: a benchmark and metric from `docs/benchmarks/registry.json`, the value with its interval, repeats and date, the code it measured (release, commit and product-code hash), the model, judge, harness and conditions, and the run folders it came from. Rows are appended and never edited. `uv run python docs/benchmarks/store.py record RUN_DIR` turns a finished run into rows, and `check` validates the store in CI. The charts draw from the store through `docs/benchmarks/charts.json`, and `docs/benchmarks/figures.json` replaces `results.json` for anyone drawing the same figures. See `docs/benchmarks/README.md`.

## Changed

- **Benchmarks re-checked for 0.5.0.** On the v0.5.0 tag, search and retrieval give 0.4.1's figures at every cutoff. Run side by side with 0.4.2 on the same day, three runs each, agents do as well (78.7% of my questions about past work against 79.4%; MemoryCode with notes at session start 85.5% against 85.0%), while a call to recall's tools takes 65 ms instead of 258 ms at the median and none failed. The figures are in docs/benchmarks.md and docs/benchmarks/results.jsonl.
- **The README shows the release and 0.5.0's speed.** A PyPI badge gives the current version, the SWE-ContextBench chart carries 0.5.0's label (its re-check gave the same figures), and the results add that a call to recall's tools takes 65 ms at the median, against 258 ms in 0.4.2, with agents as accurate.