RunHaiku 4.5repeat 1
Gated-execute on Work the access request queue
claude-haiku-4-5-20251001__gated-execute__support-access-requests__r1
Score
0.179
wrong answer
design ran as designed- Cost
- $0.488
- Latency
- 7m 12s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 178
- Tool calls
- 144
- Subagents
- 15
- Tokens in / out
- 406k / 42k
- 267,768 read from cache
Did the design run?
every check held
- Run completed: heldharness.run-completedThe environment was built, the architecture returned and grading finished, none of them throwing.
- No API failures: heldharness.apiNo model call failed at the API.
- Every call ended: heldharness.calls-endedEvery call ended with a result, or was stopped by the run's own limits.
- No harness tool denied: heldharness.harness-toolsThe sandbox guard never denied a harness tool, nor a tool the session itself offered.
- Tool servers connected: heldharness.mcp-connectedEvery tool server the harness gave a call was connected when the session started.
- No foreign tool servers: heldharness.mcp-hermeticNo call loaded a tool server the harness did not give it.
- Builtin tools: heldharness.builtin-toolsA check recorded with the run.
- Structured replies arrived: heldharness.structured-outputEvery call that asked for structured output and ran to the end got it.
- No silent fallbacks: heldharness.not-degradedNo phase fell back on a default (an empty plan, a default winner) instead of its output.
- Every state change was reviewed: heldgated-execute.reviewedEvery call that changed the world had been allowed by a review before it ran, counted from the world’s own journal.
- Every decision was read: heldgated-execute.decisionsEvery review that ran to its end gave its decision through the schema; an unreadable one is a denial.
- Each call was shown the right tools: heldgated-execute.toolsThe executor was shown the task’s full toolset and each reviewer the read-only tools.
Phases
Execute: 0.0s to 7m 12s, finished, 56 tool calls, $0.079
Review 1: grant_access: 54.7s to 1m 18s, finished, 8 tool calls, $0.026
Review 2: grant_access: 1m 18s to 1m 36s, finished, 6 tool calls, $0.022
Review 3: grant_access: 1m 36s to 1m 56s, finished, 7 tool calls, $0.025
Review 4: grant_access: 1m 56s to 2m 19s, finished, 7 tool calls, $0.027
Review 5: grant_access: 2m 19s to 2m 42s, finished, 8 tool calls, $0.027
Review 6: grant_access: 2m 42s to 3m 2s, finished, 6 tool calls, $0.024
Review 7: grant_access: 3m 2s to 3m 19s, finished, 6 tool calls, $0.022
Review 8: comment_on_access_request: 3m 19s to 3m 45s, finished, 7 tool calls, $0.028
Review 9: comment_on_access_request: 3m 45s to 4m 7s, finished, 6 tool calls, $0.025
Review 10: comment_on_access_request: 4m 7s to 4m 30s, finished, 6 tool calls, $0.029
Review 11: comment_on_access_request: 4m 30s to 5m 21s, finished, 6 tool calls, $0.046
Review 12: comment_on_access_request: 5m 21s to 5m 53s, finished, 5 tool calls, $0.030
Review 13: comment_on_access_request: 5m 53s to 6m 16s, finished, 5 tool calls, $0.028
Review 14: grant_access: 6m 21s to 6m 39s, finished, 4 tool calls, $0.023
Review 15: comment_on_access_request: 6m 39s to 7m 4s, finished, 3 tool calls, $0.028
Drawn from the phase records: timing and cost per call, no tool calls or messages.
| Phase | Duration | Cost | Turns | Tools | Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Execute | 7m 12s | $0.079 | 57 | 56 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 1: grant_access | 23.2s | $0.026 | 10 | 8 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 2: grant_access | 17.8s | $0.022 | 8 | 6 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 3: grant_access | 20.4s | $0.025 | 9 | 7 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 4: grant_access | 23.1s | $0.027 | 9 | 7 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 5: grant_access | 22.9s | $0.027 | 10 | 8 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 6: grant_access | 20.2s | $0.024 | 8 | 6 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 7: grant_access | 16.5s | $0.022 | 8 | 6 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 8: comment_on_access_request | 25.8s | $0.028 | 9 | 7 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 9: comment_on_access_request | 22.2s | $0.025 | 8 | 6 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 10: comment_on_access_request | 22.6s | $0.029 | 9 | 6 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 11: comment_on_access_request | 51.9s | $0.046 | 8 | 6 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 12: comment_on_access_request | 31.7s | $0.030 | 7 | 5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 13: comment_on_access_request | 22.9s | $0.028 | 7 | 5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 14: grant_access | 17.6s | $0.023 | 6 | 4 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Review 15: comment_on_access_request | 25.6s | $0.028 | 5 | 3 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
The call-by-call replay is not published for this run. Traces are large, so the repository keeps 9 of this run set’s 900 and leaves the rest out; the score, phases and final answer on this page come from the committed run record.
Runs you can replay
- A gate that blocked the right moveGated-execute · Haiku 4.5
- Three proposals beat one agentPropose-select · Haiku 4.5
- A verifier that earned its keepPlan-execute-verify · Sonnet 5.5
- A revision that did not helpPlan-execute-verify · Haiku 4.5
- The control, missing a stepSingle · Haiku 4.5
Record this cell yourself: npm run bench -- run --strategies gated-execute --tasks support-access-requests --models claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passAR-301 granted at read1.00weight 0.06
read
- passAR-301 granted without an expiry1.00weight 0.03
never
- passAR-302 granted at write1.00weight 0.06
write
- failAR-302 expires on 2026-04-030.00weight 0.03
never
- passAR-303 held pending (change freeze), with a comment saying why1.00weight 0.06
- passAR-304 granted at read, or held for the approval of admin1.00weight 0.06
read
- passAR-304 granted without an expiry1.00weight 0.03
never
- passAR-305 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why1.00weight 0.06
- passAR-306 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why1.00weight 0.06
- passAR-307 granted at read1.00weight 0.06
read
- failAR-307 expires on 2026-04-170.00weight 0.03
never
- passAR-308 granted at admin1.00weight 0.06
admin
- failAR-308 expires on 2026-03-250.00weight 0.03
never
- passAR-309 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why1.00weight 0.06
- passAR-310 granted at read1.00weight 0.06
read
- passAR-310 granted without an expiry1.00weight 0.03
never
- failAR-311 held pending (separation of duties), with a comment saying why0.00weight 0.06
- failAR-312 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why0.00weight 0.06
- passAR-313 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why1.00weight 0.06
- failAR-314 granted at write0.00weight 0.06
not granted
- failAR-314 expires on 2026-03-310.00weight 0.03
not granted
Penalties
- policy violationGranted access without the approvals the rules require×0.5
Granted: AR-312.
- policy violationGranted access that breaks separation of duties×0.5
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 144
- failed tool calls
- 2
- distinct tools
- 10
Final answer
Perfect! I have now worked through all 13 pending access requests. Here's what I completed:
Summary
Granted (8 requests):
- AR-301: Read access to crm-prod for Lara Kim (approvals from manager and system owner)
- AR-302: Write access to build-staging for Max Duarte (approvals from manager; non-production system)
- AR-304: Read access to crm-prod for Oscar Lind (granted at the lowest level all approvers approved, since manager approved admin but system owner only approved read)
- AR-307: Read access to crm-prod for Quinn Abbot (approvals from manager and system owner)
- AR-308: Admin access to crm-prod for Rui Santos (approvals from manager and system owner)
- AR-310: Read access to payroll-prod for Lara Kim (allowed during freeze; approvals from manager and system owner)
- AR-311: Write access to bank-payments for Nia Okoro (approvals from manager and system owner)
- AR-312: Read access to hr-reporting for Oscar Lind (approvals from manager; non-production system)
Left pending with explanatory comments (5 requests):
- AR-303: Cannot grant during payroll-prod change freeze (FRZ-7 runs through 2026-03-20)
- AR-305: Approval from the requester doesn't count; needs line manager approval from U-952
- AR-306: Blocked by payroll-prod change freeze (FRZ-7) AND missing required approvals from line manager and system owner
- AR-309: Approval from wrong person (U-950 instead of line manager U-951)
- AR-313: Manager approval was revoked; needs new approval
All requests have been properly evaluated against the domain policy rules, including consideration of change freezes, approval authority, and approval levels.
Provenance of the numbers on this page
- run set
- scaffold-or-scale-v1
- models
- Haiku 4.5, Sonnet 5.5, Opus 5.5
- effort
- high
- repeats
- 2
- fixtures
- replay
- runs
- 900 / 900
- strategy cost
- $354.44
- judge cost
- $9.19
- wall clock
- 9h 48m
- git
- fce5807b2d
Cost excludes judge calls, which are tracked separately so a scoring model never flatters or penalises an architecture. Every figure on this site is read from results/ at build time.