ScaffoldBench

RunHaiku 4.5repeat 2

Plan-execute on Twelve HTTP status codes, by the book

claude-haiku-4-5-20251001__plan-execute__research-status-codes__r2

Score

1.000

passed
design ran as designed
Cost
$0.139
Latency
1m 38s
setup 0.0s, grading 0.3s
Turns
20
Tool calls
16
Subagents
0
Tokens in / out
229k / 9.1k
183,953 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.
  • 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

Plan: 0.0s to 28.6s, finished, 0 tool calls, $0.024
Execute: 28.6s to 1m 38s, finished, 16 tool calls, $0.114

Drawn from the phase records: timing and cost per call, no tool calls or messages.

PhaseDurationCostTurnsToolsModel
Plan28.6s$0.02430claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
Execute1m 10s$0.1141716claude-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

Record this cell yourself: npm run bench -- run --strategies plan-execute --tasks research-status-codes --models claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 --repeats 1

Score breakdown

  • passstatus code 203
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 206
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 303
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 307
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 308
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 405
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 410
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 413
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 414
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 421
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 422
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passstatus code 501
    1.00weight 0.08

    quote verified in rfc9110

Penalties

No penalties were applied.

Scorer metadata

corpus
{"version":2,"snapshot":"2026-10-01","hash":"9841e181cc36236e3bc98c18c73e938cf003a35611d0f06c8d8da6ee7161ee1f","documents":6}
opened documents
["rfc9110"]
opened by role
{"primary":["rfc9110"]}
displayed share
{"rfc9110":0.1152,"mdn-status-308":0.1219,"rfc9111":0.0017,"mdn-status-codes":0.018,"rfc7231":0.0013}
cited count
1
verified count
1
hallucinated count
0
citation integrity
1
hallucinated urls
[]
answer block
true
answer block repaired
false
items answered
12
item count
12
field accuracy
1
grounded items
12
field misses
{}

Final answer

Perfect! I've now gathered all the information I need. Let me compile the final answer with all the status codes I've found.

Based on my research of RFC 9110 (HTTP Semantics), I found all 12 status codes with their definitions. Here's what the specification says:

For heuristic cacheability, RFC 9110 Section 15.1 states: "Responses with status codes that are defined as heuristically cacheable (e.g., 200, 203, 204, 206, 300, 301, 308, 404, 405, 410, 414, and 501 in this specification) can be reused by a cache with heuristic expiration unless otherwise indicated by the method definition or explicit cache controls."

Each status code section confirmed this, either stating "A [code] response is heuristically cacheable" or not mentioning heuristic cacheability at all (in which case it is false).

Here are my findings for each code:

203 Non-Authoritative Information (Section 15.3.4): The section states "A 203 response is heuristically cacheable"

206 Partial Content (Section 15.3.7): The section states "A 206 response is heuristically cacheable"

303 See Other (Section 15.4.4): No mention of heuristic cacheability - not cacheable

307 Temporary Redirect (Section 15.4.8): No mention of heuristic cacheability - not cacheable

308 Permanent Redirect (Section 15.4.9): The section states "A 308 response is heuristically cacheable"

405 Method Not Allowed (Section 15.5.6): The section states "A 405 response is heuristically cacheable"

410 Gone (Section 15.5.11): The section states "A 410 response is heuristically cacheable"

413 Content Too Large (Section 15.5.14): No mention of heuristic cacheability - not cacheable

414 URI Too Long (Section 15.5.15): The section states "A 414 response is heuristically cacheable"

421 Misdirected Request (Section 15.5.20): No mention of heuristic cacheability - not cacheable

422 Unprocessable Content (Section 15.5.21): No mention of heuristic cacheability - not cacheable

501 Not Implemented (Section 15.6.2): The section states "A 501 response is heuristically cacheable"

{"answers":[{"code":"203","reason":"Non-Authoritative Information","section":"15.3.4","heuristicallyCacheable":true,"quote":"The 203 (Non-Authoritative Information) status code indicates that the request was successful but the enclosed content has been modified from that of the origin server's 200 (OK) response by a transforming proxy (Section 7.7).","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"206","reason":"Partial Content","section":"15.3.7","heuristicallyCacheable":true,"quote":"The 206 (Partial Content) status code indicates that the server is successfully fulfilling a range request for the target resource by transferring one or more parts of the selected representation.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"303","reason":"See Other","section":"15.4.4","heuristicallyCacheable":false,"quote":"The 303 (See Other) status code indicates that the server is redirecting the user agent to a different resource, as indicated by a URI in the Location header field, which is intended to provide an indirect response to the original request.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"307","reason":"Temporary Redirect","section":"15.4.8","heuristicallyCacheable":false,"quote":"The 307 (Temporary Redirect) status code indicates that the target resource resides temporarily under a different URI and the user agent MUST NOT change the request method if it performs an automatic redirection to that URI.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"308","reason":"Permanent Redirect","section":"15.4.9","heuristicallyCacheable":true,"quote":"The 308 (Permanent Redirect) status code indicates that the target resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any future references to this resource ought to use one of the enclosed URIs.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"405","reason":"Method Not Allowed","section":"15.5.6","heuristicallyCacheable":true,"quote":"The 405 (Method Not Allowed) status code indicates that the method received in the request-line is known by the origin server but not supported by the target resource.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"410","reason":"Gone","section":"15.5.11","heuristicallyCacheable":true,"quote":"The 410 (Gone) status code indicates that access to the target resource is no longer available at the origin server and that this condition is likely to be permanent.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"413","reason":"Content Too Large","section":"15.5.14","heuristicallyCacheable":false,"quote":"The 413 (Content Too Large) status code indicates that the server is refusing to process a request because the request content is larger than the server is willing or able to process.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"414","reason":"URI Too Long","section":"15.5.15","heuristicallyCacheable":true,"quote":"The 414 (URI Too Long) status code indicates that the server is refusing to service the request because the target URI is longer than the server is willing to interpret.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"421","reason":"Misdirected Request","section":"15.5.20","heuristicallyCacheable":false,"quote":"The 421 (Misdirected Request) status code indicates that the request was directed at a server that is unable or unwilling to produce an authoritative response for the target URI.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"422","reason":"Unprocessable Content","section":"15.5.21","heuristicallyCacheable":false,"quote":"The 422 (Unprocessable Content) status code indicates that the server understands the content type of the request content (hence a 415 (Unsupported Media Type) status code is inappropriate), and the syntax of the request content is correct, but it was unable to process the contained instructions.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},{"code":"501","reason":"Not Implemented","section":"15.6.2","heuristicallyCacheable":true,"quote":"The 501 (Not Implemented) status code indicates that the server does not support the functionality required to fulfill the request.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"}]}

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.