RunOpus 5.5repeat 2
Plan-execute on Share two short deliveries out among backorders
claude-opus-5-5__plan-execute__ecommerce-backorder-allocation__r2
Score
1.000
- Cost
- $0.557
- Latency
- 2m 9s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 84
- Tool calls
- 81
- Subagents
- 0
- Tokens in / out
- 411k / 13k
- 380,486 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.planThe planner’s reply was read through its schema and held at least one step.
- Each call was shown the right tools: heldplan-execute.toolsThe planner was shown no tools and the executor the task’s 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 | 23.7s | $0.061 | 2 | 0 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Execute | 1m 46s | $0.496 | 82 | 81 | 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 --tasks ecommerce-backorder-allocation --models claude-opus-5-5 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passO-5201 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5201: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5202 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
- passO-5202: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5203 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5203: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5204 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5204: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5206 left waiting, with a promise date1.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-14 L2=backordered@2026-08-14 L3=pending
- passO-5206 waiting lines promised for the date the in-transit supply gives them1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-14, L2@2026-08-14
- passO-5206: customer told once, with the promised date1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5207 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
- passO-5207: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5208 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5208: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5209 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5209: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5210 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
- passO-5210: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5211 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=shipped
- passO-5211: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5212 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5212: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5213 left waiting, with a promise date1.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-14
- passO-5213 waiting lines promised for the date the in-transit supply gives them1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-14
- passO-5213: customer told once, with the promised date1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5214 left waiting, with a promise date1.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-19
- passO-5214 waiting lines promised for the date the in-transit supply gives them1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-19
- passO-5214: customer told once, with the promised date1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5215 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5215: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passBoth deliveries were allocated in full1.00weight 0.03
P-DOC stock=0, P-MON stock=0
Penalties
No penalties were applied.
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 81
- failed tool calls
- 0
- distinct tools
- 10
Final answer
I've worked the dock and monitor backorders. 11 orders now have stock set aside, the 3 that still have waiting lines have promise dates, one order on risk hold was left alone, and all 14 customers I worked have had one notice each.
Things that differ from the plan:
- Date: The system says today is 2026-07-25, not 2026-10-06 as the plan states. PO-88 and PO-89 were both received on 07-25, so I used that date.
- More stock arrived while I was working: PO-91 (4 docks) and PO-93 (3 monitors) were received during the run, so they were no longer in transit and couldn't be used for promise dates. The handbook says received stock goes to waiting lines in priority order, so I allocated it too. In total that was 11 docks and 7 monitors. I checked that the lines I'd already allocated would have come out the same if I had started with all of the stock at once. I re-checked the purchase orders before setting dates and before sending notices.
Policy updates:
- PU-12 applies (in force from 2026-07-01, no end date). Orders placed 14 or more days before today, so on or before 07-11, go to the front of the queue, oldest first, whatever the customer's tier.
- PU-9 does not apply. It only covered June (gold customers ranking with platinum).
Priority order used: the older orders first (O-5201, O-5202, O-5203, O-5204), then platinum (O-5206, O-5207), then gold (O-5208, O-5209, O-5210), then standard (O-5211, O-5212, O-5213, O-5214, O-5215).
Allocated (each line in full):
- Docks (11): O-5201 L1 ×2, O-5202 L2 ×1, O-5204 L1 ×2, O-5207 L1 ×1, O-5209 L1 ×2, O-5210 L1 ×1, O-5211 L1 ×1, O-5215 L1 ×1.
- Monitors (7): O-5202 L1 ×1, O-5203 L1 ×2, O-5207 L2 ×1, O-5208 L1 ×2, O-5212 L1 ×1.
- O-5207 must ship complete, and both its lines were covered at once.
- Dock and monitor stock are now both at 0.
Still waiting, with promise dates set:
| Line | What | Date | Covered by |
|---|---|---|---|
| O-5206 L1 | 1 dock | 2026-08-14 | PO-95 |
| O-5206 L2 | 1 USB-C hub | 2026-08-14 | PO-90 (arrives 08-06) |
| O-5213 L1 | 2 docks | 2026-08-14 | PO-95 |
| O-5214 L1 | 1 monitor | 2026-08-19 | PO-97 |
- O-5206 must ship complete. It's waiting because the hub is out of stock, so its dock wasn't allocated either. Both lines get the later of their two dates.
- O-5213 needed 2 docks when only 1 was left, so it waits and the single dock went to O-5215 behind it.
- Incoming stock covers every waiting line, so none is left without a date.
Risk hold: O-5205 (Jon Reyes, 1 dock) was left untouched: no stock, no date, no notice.
Notices sent: N-1 to N-14, one per customer, for O-5201 to O-5204 and O-5206 to O-5215. Each says which lines are now in stock and set aside, or gives the promise date for lines still waiting.
Nothing was dispatched, cancelled, refunded or put back into stock.
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.