RunHaiku 4.5repeat 1
Plan-execute on Audit a week of baggage fees
claude-haiku-4-5-20251001__plan-execute__airline-baggage-audit__r1
Score
0.519
- Cost
- $0.195
- Latency
- 3m 35s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 83
- Tool calls
- 80
- Subagents
- 0
- Tokens in / out
- 167k / 24k
- 133,371 read from cache
Did the design run?
- 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.
- The plan was a plan: heldplan-execute.planThe planner’s reply was read through its schema and held at least one step.
- Each call was shown the right tools: heldplan-execute.toolsThe planner was shown no tools and the executor the task’s full toolset.
Phases
Drawn from the phase records: timing and cost per call, no tool calls or messages.
| Phase | Duration | Cost | Turns | Tools | Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plan | 53.3s | $0.031 | 2 | 0 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Execute | 2m 42s | $0.165 | 81 | 80 | 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 plan-execute --tasks airline-baggage-audit --models claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passL2 (R8124): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL2: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- failL3 (R8125): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any0.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 12000
- failL3: audit outcome recorded as overcharged0.00weight 0.02
- passL4 (R8112): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL4: audit outcome recorded as undercharged1.00weight 0.02
- failL5 (R8116): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any0.00weight 0.04
refunded 7500 of an expected 5500
- passL5: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- failL6 (R8117): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any0.00weight 0.04
refunded 7500 of an expected 0
- failL6: audit outcome recorded as correct0.00weight 0.02
- passL7 (R8118): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 4500 of an expected 4500
- passL7: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- failL8 (R8120): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any0.00weight 0.04
refunded 7500 of an expected 0
- failL8: audit outcome recorded as correct0.00weight 0.02
- failL9 (R8126): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any0.00weight 0.04
refunded 7500 of an expected 0
- failL9: audit outcome recorded as correct0.00weight 0.02
- passL10 (R8113): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 7500 of an expected 7500
- passL10: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL11 (R8115): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL11: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL12 (R8122): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL12: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- failL13 (R8123): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any0.00weight 0.04
refunded 4500 of an expected 0
- failL13: audit outcome recorded as correct0.00weight 0.02
- passL15 (R8119): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 2500 of an expected 2500
- passL15: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL16 (R8110): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL16: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL17 (R8111): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL17: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL18 (R8114): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL18: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL19 (R8114): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 5000 of an expected 5000
- passL19: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL20 (R8121): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL20: audit outcome recorded as undercharged1.00weight 0.02
- failL21 (R8122): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any0.00weight 0.04
refunded 7500 of an expected 0
- failL21: audit outcome recorded as correct0.00weight 0.02
Penalties
- policy violationRefunded more than a charge was overcharged×0.8
Refunded beyond the overcharge: L5, L6, L8, L9, L13, L21.
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 80
- failed tool calls
- 0
- distinct tools
- 9
Final answer
Perfect! I have completed the audit of all baggage fees posted between 2026-07-20 and 2026-07-26. Here's my final summary:
Audit Summary
Total entries audited: 19 baggage fees
Results:
Correct (7 entries): L2, L3, L11, L12, L16, L17, L18
- These fees properly calculated free allowances (cabin + tier bonus) and charged only for excess bags
Overcharged (10 entries): L5, L6, L7, L8, L9, L10, L13, L15, L19, L21
- Total overcharges: $610.00 (61,000 cents) - ALL REFUNDED
Undercharged (2 entries): L4, L20
- L4: Rosa Vidal undercharged $30.00 (9,000 vs. 12,000)
- L20: Carlos Mendes undercharged $5.00 (4,500 vs. 5,000)
- No re-billing per domain policy
Key Issues Found:
- Tier bonus misapplication: Most overcharges were from failing to apply frequent-flyer tier bonuses (silver: +1 bag, gold: +2 bags) to the free allowance
- Duplicate charges: R8114 was charged twice on 2026-07-25 for the same 3 bags (L18 and L19, both $50)
- Multiple fees for same reservation: R8122 charged twice (L12 on 2026-07-22 and L21 on 2026-07-25), violating the "single fee per reservation" rule. L21 was refunded as a duplicate.
- Rate change inconsistency: R8119 (2026-07-24) was charged at old rate (7,500) instead of new rate (5,000 for first chargeable from 2026-07-23)
All actions completed:
- ✅ 10 overcharge/duplicate refunds issued ($610 total)
- ✅ All 19 entries annotated with audit outcomes
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.