ScaffoldBench

RunOpus 5.5repeat 1

Plan-execute-verify on Consolidate duplicate CRM reports

claude-opus-5-5__plan-execute-verify__support-medium__r1

Score

1.000

passed
design ran as designed
Cost
$0.371
Latency
1m 32s
setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
Turns
54
Tool calls
46
Subagents
0
Tokens in / out
169k / 8.0k
138,731 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 21.0s, finished, 0 tool calls, $0.042
Execute: 21.0s to 46.4s, finished, 18 tool calls, $0.122
Verify: 46.4s to 1m 6s, finished, 11 tool calls, $0.074
Revise (round 1): 1m 6s to 1m 20s, finished, 6 tool calls, $0.066
Verify revision 1: 1m 20s to 1m 32s, finished, 11 tool calls, $0.067

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

PhaseDurationCostTurnsToolsModel
Plan21.0s$0.04220claude-opus-5-5
Execute25.4s$0.1221918claude-opus-5-5
Verify19.7s$0.0741311claude-opus-5-5
Revise (round 1)14.3s$0.06676claude-opus-5-5
Verify revision 111.9s$0.0671311claude-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 support-medium --models claude-opus-5-5 --repeats 1

Score breakdown

  • passSurvivor carries the earliest SLA deadline of the merged set
    1.00weight 0.23

    sla_due_at=2026-03-17T12:40:00Z (expected 2026-03-17T12:40:00Z)

  • passBoth duplicate reports were merged into the earliest-created ticket
    1.00weight 0.23

    T-1053: status=merged, merged_into=T-1052; T-1054: status=merged, merged_into=T-1052

  • passThe engineering tracking ticket now points at the survivor
    1.00weight 0.15

    T-1061 links=[T-1052]

  • passSurvivor re-graded from the matrix for its widened impact scope
    1.00weight 0.15

    severity=sev2 (matrix says sev2)

  • passSurvivor assigned to the engineer on call for the owning rotation at its deadline
    1.00weight 0.15

    assignee=E-201 (expected E-201)

  • passEvery ticket folded in was read before the merge
    1.00weight 0.08

Penalties

No penalties were applied.

Scorer metadata

tool calls
46
failed tool calls
0
distinct tools
11

Final answer

I've fixed the problem the verifier found: T-1052 is assigned to E-201 Ines Kovac again.

  • What went wrong: Escalating the ticket had also replaced the assignee with E-101 Dana Whitfield. She isn't on the business-apps team, which owns CRM, so she shouldn't hold the ticket.
  • The fix: I confirmed Ines Kovac is on call for business-apps at the 12:40Z deadline (her shift runs 08:00–20:00Z), then reassigned the ticket to her.
  • Unchanged: The escalation still goes to E-101 Dana Whitfield, who is on call for platform-primary, the team the escalation matrix names for sev2. Status is still escalated, severity is sev2, impact is department-wide, and the deadline is still 2026-03-17T12:40Z.
  • Comment: I added a comment to T-1052 explaining the correction, so the earlier comment saying it was assigned to E-201 now matches the ticket.

I re-read the ticket after the change and it shows E-201 as assignee and E-101 as the escalation. I didn't touch any other ticket.

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.