ScaffoldBench

RunOpus 5.5repeat 2

Plan-execute-verify on Audit a week of baggage fees

claude-opus-5-5__plan-execute-verify__airline-baggage-audit__r2

Score

0.772

wrong answer
design ran as designed
Cost
$0.957
Latency
3m 55s
setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
Turns
184
Tool calls
175
Subagents
0
Tokens in / out
555k / 22k
490,688 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-verify.planThe planner’s reply was read through its schema and held at least one step.
  • Every verdict was read: heldplan-execute-verify.verdictsEvery review round ended with a verdict read from the schema reply, not a default.
  • The loop did what its verdicts said: heldplan-execute-verify.loopEvery verdict that called for a revision got one, and nothing was revised without such a verdict.
  • Each call was shown the right tools: heldplan-execute-verify.toolsThe planner was shown no tools, the verifier the read-only ones, and the executor and reviser the full toolset.

Phases

Plan: 0.0s to 15.1s, finished, 0 tool calls, $0.029
Execute: 15.1s to 2m 8s, finished, 94 tool calls, $0.432
Verify: 2m 8s to 3m 0s, finished, 69 tool calls, $0.300
Revise (round 1): 3m 0s to 3m 14s, finished, 1 tool call, $0.050
Verify revision 1: 3m 14s to 3m 42s, finished, 10 tool calls, $0.106
Revise (round 2): 3m 42s to 3m 55s, finished, 1 tool call, $0.040

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

PhaseDurationCostTurnsToolsModel
Plan15.1s$0.02920claude-opus-5-5
Execute1m 52s$0.4329594claude-opus-5-5
Verify52.5s$0.3007169claude-opus-5-5
Revise (round 1)14.2s$0.05021claude-opus-5-5
Verify revision 127.4s$0.1061210claude-opus-5-5
Revise (round 2)13.2s$0.04021claude-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

Record this cell yourself: npm run bench -- run --strategies plan-execute-verify --tasks airline-baggage-audit --models claude-opus-5-5 --repeats 1

Score breakdown

  • passL2 (R8124): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL2: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL3 (R8125): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 12000 of an expected 12000

  • passL3: audit outcome recorded as overcharged
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL4 (R8112): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL4: audit outcome recorded as undercharged
    1.00weight 0.02
  • failL5 (R8116): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    0.00weight 0.04

    refunded 7500 of an expected 5500

  • passL5: audit outcome recorded as overcharged
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL6 (R8117): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL6: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL7 (R8118): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 4500 of an expected 4500

  • passL7: audit outcome recorded as overcharged
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL8 (R8120): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL8: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL9 (R8126): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL9: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL10 (R8113): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 7500 of an expected 7500

  • passL10: audit outcome recorded as overcharged
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL11 (R8115): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL11: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL12 (R8122): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL12: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL13 (R8123): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL13: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL15 (R8119): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 2500 of an expected 2500

  • passL15: audit outcome recorded as overcharged
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL16 (R8110): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL16: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL17 (R8111): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL17: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL18 (R8114): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL18: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL19 (R8114): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 5000 of an expected 5000

  • passL19: audit outcome recorded as overcharged
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL20 (R8121): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL20: audit outcome recorded as undercharged
    1.00weight 0.02
  • passL21 (R8122): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any
    1.00weight 0.04

    refunded 0 of an expected 0

  • passL21: audit outcome recorded as correct
    1.00weight 0.02

Penalties

  • policy violationRefunded more than a charge was overcharged×0.8

    Refunded beyond the overcharge: L5.

Scorer metadata

tool calls
175
failed tool calls
0
distinct tools
12

Final answer

I checked R8116 again and the verifier is right. The customer has been refunded $20.00 more than they were overcharged. I made no further changes, because the only way to fix it in the system would be to bill the customer again, and the rules forbid that.

What the R8116 ledger shows

  • L5 (2026-07-21) charged $120.00 for checked bags and is already marked "overcharged". The fee should have been $45.00. The passenger is silver, and economy with silver gives 2 free bags, so of the 3 bags only 1 was chargeable at $45.00. That makes the overcharge $75.00.
  • L24 (2026-07-27) refunded $20.00 against L5 to the original payment method. agent-3 gave this as a courtesy before my audit.
  • L26 (2026-07-28) was my audit refund of $75.00. It should have been $55.00, the part of the overcharge that hadn't already been refunded.
  • In total $95.00 went back against a $75.00 overcharge, so the customer has $20.00 too much.

Why I didn't change anything

  • No new charge: taking the $20.00 back would mean billing the customer again, which the rules forbid.
  • Refund can't be reversed: none of the tools can undo or edit a refund that has already gone out.
  • L5 needs no change: it's correctly marked "overcharged", and there are no other entries to correct.

For Finance: please handle the $20.00 over-refund on reservation R8116 (passenger P-3116) outside the audit. It comes from L24 ($20.00) plus L26 ($75.00), both paid to the original card against a $75.00 overcharge on L5.

Correction to my earlier report: on the R8116 / L5 row, the audit refund should have been $55.00, not $75.00. My audit refunds total $395.00. With the earlier $20.00 courtesy refund, $415.00 has gone back across the audited fees. The rest of the audit stands as reported. In future audits I'll subtract any earlier refunds against a fee before refunding it.

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.