ScaffoldBench

RunHaiku 4.5repeat 2

Propose-select on Work the access request queue

claude-haiku-4-5-20251001__propose-select__support-access-requests__r2

Score

0.829

wrong answer
design ran as designed
Cost
$0.489
Latency
5m 14s
setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
Turns
205
Tool calls
199
Subagents
3
Tokens in / out
407k / 55k
308,166 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.
  • All three proposers ran: heldpropose-select.proposalsThree proposers ran in parallel, each from its own angle, and none was starved while another ran.
  • The selector chose: heldpropose-select.selectionThe selector picked a proposal by a valid number, read from its schema reply and not a default.
  • Each call was shown the right tools: heldpropose-select.toolsEach proposer was shown the read-only tools, the selector none, and the executor the full toolset.

Phases

Proposal 1 (policy-first): 0.0s to 2m 17s, finished, 51 tool calls, $0.122
Proposal 2 (state-first): 0.0s to 1m 18s, finished, 47 tool calls, $0.089
Proposal 3 (outcome-first): 0.0s to 1m 40s, finished, 52 tool calls, $0.101
Select: 2m 17s to 3m 54s, finished, 0 tool calls, $0.080
Execute: 3m 54s to 5m 14s, finished, 49 tool calls, $0.097

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

PhaseDurationCostTurnsToolsModel
Proposal 1 (policy-first)2m 17s$0.1225251claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
Proposal 2 (state-first)1m 18s$0.0894847claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
Proposal 3 (outcome-first)1m 40s$0.1015352claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
Select1m 37s$0.08020claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
Execute1m 20s$0.0975049claude-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 propose-select --tasks support-access-requests --models claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 --repeats 1

Score breakdown

  • passAR-301 granted at read
    1.00weight 0.06

    read

  • passAR-301 granted without an expiry
    1.00weight 0.03

    never

  • passAR-302 granted at write
    1.00weight 0.06

    write

  • passAR-302 expires on 2026-04-03
    1.00weight 0.03

    2026-04-03T23:59:59Z

  • passAR-303 held pending (change freeze), with a comment saying why
    1.00weight 0.06
  • passAR-304 granted at read, or held for the approval of admin
    1.00weight 0.06

    not granted

  • passAR-304 granted without an expiry
    1.00weight 0.03

    not granted

  • passAR-305 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why
    1.00weight 0.06
  • passAR-306 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why
    1.00weight 0.06
  • failAR-307 granted at read
    0.00weight 0.06

    not granted

  • failAR-307 expires on 2026-04-17
    0.00weight 0.03

    not granted

  • passAR-308 granted at admin
    1.00weight 0.06

    admin

  • passAR-308 expires on 2026-03-25
    1.00weight 0.03

    2026-03-25T23:59:59Z

  • passAR-309 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why
    1.00weight 0.06
  • passAR-310 granted at read
    1.00weight 0.06

    read

  • passAR-310 granted without an expiry
    1.00weight 0.03

    never

  • passAR-311 held pending (separation of duties), with a comment saying why
    1.00weight 0.06
  • passAR-312 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why
    1.00weight 0.06
  • passAR-313 held pending (missing approval), with a comment saying why
    1.00weight 0.06
  • failAR-314 granted at write
    0.00weight 0.06

    not granted

  • failAR-314 expires on 2026-03-31
    0.00weight 0.03

    not granted

Penalties

No penalties were applied.

Scorer metadata

tool calls
199
failed tool calls
0
distinct tools
12

Final answer

Summary

I have completed the work on all 13 pending access requests by following the domain policy's access control rules:

✓ GRANTED (4 requests):

  1. AR-301 (U-901 Lara Kim → crm-prod, read)

    • Both manager (U-950) and system owner (E-202) approved read level
    • Grant: read, no expiry (employee)

  2. AR-302 (U-902 Max Duarte → build-staging, write)

    • Manager (U-950) approved; staging doesn't require system owner approval
    • Grant: write, expires 2026-04-03 (contractor's contract end date)

  3. AR-310 (U-901 Lara Kim → payroll-prod, read)

    • Both manager (U-950) and system owner (E-201) approved read level
    • Grant: read, no expiry (employee; read access allowed during freeze FRZ-7)

  4. AR-308 (U-907 Rui Santos → crm-prod, admin)

    • Both manager (U-951) and system owner (E-202) approved admin level
    • Grant: admin, expires 2026-03-25 (7-day rule for admin on production)

✓ HELD PENDING (9 requests with explanatory comments):

  1. AR-303 - Change freeze FRZ-7 blocks new admin access until 2026-03-20
  2. AR-304 - System owner approved only read level; admin approval needed
  3. AR-305 - Self-approval doesn't count; needs manager (U-952) approval
  4. AR-306 - No approvals recorded + blocked by change freeze
  5. AR-307 - Contractor's contract end date not recorded; cannot calculate expiry
  6. AR-309 - Approval from U-950 but correct manager is U-951
  7. AR-311 - Separation of duties violation: requester already has write on payroll-prod
  8. AR-312 - Manager approval stale (17 days old; 14-day limit exceeded)
  9. AR-313 - Only approval was revoked; needs fresh manager approval

All actions comply with the binding domain policy: approvals are valid, request levels don't exceed what approvers approved, change freezes are respected, contractor expiries are calculated correctly, and separation of duties conflicts are blocked.

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.