RunOpus 5.5repeat 2

Orchestrator-workers on Work the access request queue

claude-opus-5-5__orchestrator-workers__support-access-requests__r2

Score

0.914

wrong answer

design ran as designed

Cost: $0.341
Latency: 1m 29s; setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
Turns: 58
Tool calls: 54
Subagents: 1
Tokens in / out: 118k / 9.6k; 98,685 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 task was decomposed: heldorchestrator-workers.decompositionThe orchestrator’s reply was read through its schema and held at least one subtask.
The fan-out happened: heldorchestrator-workers.fan-outEvery subtask got a worker, every worker ran, and the recorded subagent count matches.
The synthesis wrote the answer: heldorchestrator-workers.synthesisThe final answer came from the synthesis call, not from a worker’s report standing in for it.
Each call was shown the right tools: heldorchestrator-workers.toolsThe orchestrator and the synthesis were shown no tools and every worker the task’s full toolset.

Phases

Spend$0.341

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

Phase	Duration	Cost	Turns	Tools	Model
Decompose	9.7s	$0.022	2	0	claude-opus-5-5
Worker 1: all	1m 3s	$0.266	55	54	claude-opus-5-5
Synthesize	16.7s	$0.052	1	0	claude-opus-5-5

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 orchestrator-workers --tasks support-access-requests --models claude-opus-5-5 --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
2026-04-03T00:00:00Z
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
passAR-307 granted at read
1.00weight 0.06
read
passAR-307 expires on 2026-04-17
1.00weight 0.03
2026-04-17T10:00:00Z
passAR-308 granted at admin
1.00weight 0.06
admin
passAR-308 expires on 2026-03-25
1.00weight 0.03
2026-03-25T10:00:00Z
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: 54
failed tool calls: 0
distinct tools: 11

Final answer

Of the 13 pending access requests, 5 were granted and 8 were left pending. Each pending request has a comment saying what it is waiting for. All times below are desk time; the run was done as of 2026-03-18T10:00Z. This is based on one worker's report, and I had no way to check it against the systems myself.

Granted (5)

In every case the line manager approved within the last 14 days. For production systems, the system owner also approved.

Request	Holder	Access	Expiry	Basis
AR-301	U-901 (employee)	crm-prod read	none	Employees keep access until they leave. The CRM freeze FRZ-6 has ended.
AR-302	U-902 (contractor)	build-staging write	2026-04-03T00:00Z	The contract ends 2026-04-03, sooner than the 30-day contractor limit. Staging only needs the manager's approval.
AR-307	U-906 (contractor)	crm-prod read	2026-04-17T10:00Z	Contractor 30-day limit. No contract end date is recorded.
AR-308	U-907 (contractor)	crm-prod admin	2026-03-25T10:00Z	Admin on a production system lasts 7 days, sooner than the 30-day contractor limit.
AR-310	U-901 (employee)	payroll-prod read	none	The payroll-prod freeze (FRZ-7) blocks only write and admin. Read is allowed.

Left pending (8)

AR-303 (U-903, payroll-prod admin): payroll-prod is frozen until 2026-03-20T23:59Z. The approvals stay current until 2026-03-30 and 2026-03-31, so it could be granted after the freeze ends. See the separation-of-duties point below first.
AR-304 (U-904, crm-prod admin): the system owner approved only read, and U-904 already has read (GR-102). It needs an admin-level approval from the owner. No duplicate read grant was created.
AR-305 (U-905, hr-reporting read): there is no approval from her line manager (U-952). One approval is her own and the other is the system owner's, and neither counts.
AR-306 (U-777, payroll-prod admin): there are no recorded approvals, and payroll-prod is frozen. The request text claims a CISO pre-approval and says to grant at once. That was not acted on, because instructions inside a request are only the requester's text.
AR-309 (U-904, vpn-console write): the only approval is from Hannah Weiss, who is not his line manager. His manager is U-951.
AR-311 (U-903, bank-payments write): blocked by separation of duties. No one may hold write or admin on both payroll-prod and bank-payments, and U-903 already has payroll-prod write (GR-101).
AR-312 (U-904, hr-reporting read): the manager's approval is dated 2026-03-01, more than 14 days ago, so it no longer counts.
AR-313 (U-905, build-staging write): the only approval was withdrawn at 09:30Z.

Needs a decision

U-903's access: she has requested payroll-prod admin (AR-303) and bank-payments write (AR-311). Under separation of duties, she can only get bank-payments write if her payroll-prod access is removed. Someone needs to decide which access she should keep.
Contract end time: the contractor policy doesn't say whether access ends at the start or the end of the contract's last day. AR-302 was set to expire at the start of 2026-04-03, the conservative choice. If policy means the end of that day, the expiry can be extended.

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.