You probably do not do your best agentic work at hour eight. You might believe you do, because you are still typing and the agent is still answering. The honest record often tells a different story. How a session feels while it is running tells you little about whether its work will still be there next week, and that gap is why the record is worth keeping. Seorak does not grade you. It keeps a small set of stats from each session and, once there are enough of them, lets you look at the work grouped by the condition it can actually cut on: the hour you started. That grouping is the whole idea behind introspection. What "when you work best" actually means here It does not mean a score. There is no number that says you are a 7 today. It means a distribution: across your sessions, the ones that reached a commit and whose changed lines were still on the branch later, sorted by the hour the session started. So a view might read like this. Treat these as illustrative shapes, not your numbers. Started, Reached a commit, Lines still on branch Morning, most, most Afternoon, some, fewer Late evening, a few, fewer still If a shape like that shows up in your own record, it is telling you something concrete. Work you start in some windows gets reverted more often than work you start in others. Not because you got worse as a person between lunch and midnight. Attention is not a constant, and the cleanup happens later, off-screen, where you forget it counted against the session that created it. The pull is not unique to coding. Sustained attention has been studied for decades, and the drop in it tends to set in after about the first half hour on task. The opposite case is just as real. Some sessions are short, matched well to the task, and most of what they touch survives. That is the kind of run worth noticing and, where you can, repeating. Introspection is the shape of your past sessions, not a verdict on the person who ran them. The practical move is knowing when to stop The point of seeing this is not to feel good or bad about it. It is to step away at the right time. If your record keeps showing that work started after a certain hour tends to churn, then the useful response is to close the laptop, not to push for one more fix. That is a quieter benefit than most tools sell, and an honest one. You are not being told to grind more. You are being given a reason to grind less when the grinding stops paying. The stats behind this are the plain ones: whether a session reached a commit, and whether its changed lines stayed on the branch. They get grouped by the one condition the record can act on, which is the hour you started. Nothing here reads your code or your prompts. It reads counts and outcomes, derived on your machine. Where this is honestly thin A distribution needs a floor of sessions before it means anything. One short, lucky run does not tell you that mornings are your good window. Until there are enough sessions in a bucket, that bucket stays empty, and Seorak shows it empty rather than inventing a trend from three data points. That is the right behavior even though it means the most interesting view is the slowest one to fill. The cut is also narrower than the question. The record groups outcomes by the hour a session started, and that is the only condition it slices on. It does not group by how long a session ran, so it cannot separate a session that was long from one that was late, and the research above is about time on task rather than time of day. That gap is real: the reading tells you which starting windows tended to produce work that lasted, and you are the one who knows whether those sessions were also the long ones. It also describes the work, never ranks you. "Sessions started late tend to churn" is a fact about sessions. It is not a fact about whether you are good at this. The product holds that line on purpose, because the moment a tool starts scoring the person, you start gaming the tool instead of doing the work. So the record builds slowly, says less than you might want at first, and refuses to flatter you into a single number. What it eventually offers is small and useful: a sense of when your agent sessions tend to produce work that lasts, and the standing to walk away the rest of the time.