RunOpus 5.5repeat 2
Plan-execute-verify on Return an expired, partially shipped order
claude-opus-5-5__plan-execute-verify__ecommerce-hard__r2
Score
1.000
- Cost
- $0.148
- Latency
- 54.7s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 19
- Tool calls
- 14
- Subagents
- 0
- Tokens in / out
- 59k / 3.6k
- 46,533 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-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
Drawn from the phase records: timing and cost per call, no tool calls or messages.
| Phase | Duration | Cost | Turns | Tools | Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plan | 13.3s | $0.026 | 2 | 0 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Execute | 34.4s | $0.088 | 11 | 10 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Verify | 7.0s | $0.034 | 6 | 4 | 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 plan-execute-verify --tasks ecommerce-hard --models claude-opus-5-5 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passThe two shipped lines were returned as store credit for exactly what they cost1.00weight 0.27
- passThe credit reached the customer balance, not just the ledger1.00weight 0.18
storeCreditCents=55300
- passThe line that never shipped was cancelled and refunded to the card1.00weight 0.27
line L3: status=cancelled refundedCents=13800 method=card
- passCancelled units were restocked and returned units were not1.00weight 0.18
P-HUB=10 P-DOC=3 P-MON=5
- passRead the return policy before issuing a refund1.00weight 0.09
Penalties
No penalties were applied.
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 14
- failed tool calls
- 0
- distinct tools
- 8
Final answer
I've processed all of Priya Raman's order O-3001 (customer C-300). She's been refunded the full £686.00 she paid: £138.00 to her card and £548.00 as store credit, because the two items that shipped are outside the 30-day return window.
| Line | Item | What I did | Refund |
|---|---|---|---|
| L3 | P-HUB USB-C Hub ×2 | Hadn't shipped, so I cancelled it rather than treating it as a return. I put both units back in stock (8 → 10). | £138.00 to her card (RF-1) |
| L1 | P-DOC ×1 | Shipped 2026-05-04, recorded as a return | £219.00 store credit |
| L2 | P-MON ×1 | Shipped 2026-05-04, recorded as a return | £329.00 store credit |
- Why store credit for L1 and L2: the return policy measures its 30-day window from the date each item shipped. After that, returns can only be paid as store credit, not back to the card. Both items shipped 2026-05-04, well over 30 days ago.
- Dates: the order system gives today as 2026-07-25, not the 2026-10-06 I was given. It doesn't change the outcome, since either date puts the items outside the window.
- Store credit: £548.00 is recorded against the order (RF-2) and added to her account, so her balance went from £5.00 to £553.00.
- Warehouse: the docking station (L1) and monitor (L2) have not been put back in stock. That should only happen once the warehouse actually receives them.
- Order record: O-3001 now shows as returned, with £686.00 of £686.00 refunded and no line refunded more than she paid for it. I didn't change the shipping address or any other order.
One assumption: L3 was marked "pending", not "backordered", so I treated its stock as set aside for her and restocked 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.