ScaffoldBench

RunOpus 5.5repeat 2

Plan-execute on Where ten HTTP header fields are defined

claude-opus-5-5__plan-execute__research-header-fields__r2

Score

1.000

passed
design ran as designed
Cost
$0.550
Latency
1m 5s
setup 0.0s, grading 0.1s
Turns
29
Tool calls
26
Subagents
0
Tokens in / out
258k / 6.8k
208,285 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.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

Plan: 0.0s to 17.6s, finished, 0 tool calls, $0.045
Execute: 17.6s to 1m 5s, finished, 26 tool calls, $0.505

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

PhaseDurationCostTurnsToolsModel
Plan17.6s$0.04520claude-opus-5-5
Execute47.0s$0.5052726claude-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 --tasks research-header-fields --models claude-opus-5-5 --repeats 1

Score breakdown

  • passheader field Age
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc9111

  • passheader field Cache-Control
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc9111

  • passheader field Expires
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc9111

  • passheader field Last-Modified
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passheader field ETag
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passheader field Location
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passheader field Retry-After
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passheader field Vary
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc9110

  • passheader field Strict-Transport-Security
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc6797

  • passheader field Link
    1.00weight 0.10

    quote verified in rfc8288

Penalties

No penalties were applied.

Scorer metadata

corpus
{"version":2,"snapshot":"2026-10-01","hash":"86bd1bd14f66db67ec5c7686f5e47663ee99f16c49edb5b9384b8668854857dc","documents":9}
opened documents
["rfc9111","rfc9110","rfc6797","rfc8288"]
opened by role
{"primary":["rfc9111","rfc9110","rfc6797","rfc8288"]}
displayed share
{"rfc9111":0.2954,"rfc9110":0.0667,"rfc6797":0.1493,"rfc8288":0.342,"mdn-header-cache-control":0.0168,"rfc7234":0.003,"rfc7231":0.0012,"mdn-header-strict-transport-security":0.0278,"rfc7232":0.0034}
cited count
4
verified count
4
hallucinated count
0
citation integrity
1
hallucinated urls
[]
answer block
true
answer block repaired
false
items answered
10
item count
10
field accuracy
1
grounded items
10
field misses
{}

Final answer

All 10 fields come from four RFCs: RFC 9111, RFC 9110, RFC 6797 and RFC 8288. I took each section number from the heading in the body of the RFC, not the table of contents, and each quote from the text under that heading.

One check didn't work. The plan was to confirm on the RFC Editor "info" pages that none of these RFCs has been obsoleted. Those pages returned 404, and the Datatracker links loaded the plain RFC text, which doesn't show status. Instead I ran three searches: one for RFC 9111 and one each for RFC 6797 and RFC 8288. None of them turned up a replacement RFC. That supports the answers below but doesn't prove them.

HTTP caching: RFC 9111 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9111.html). Its header says "Obsoletes: 7234", and it replaces RFC 7234, the older caching RFC.

  • Age: section 5.1
  • Cache-Control: section 5.2
  • Expires: section 5.3

HTTP semantics: RFC 9110 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html). It obsoletes RFCs 7231, 7232, 7233, 7235 and others, so those older RFCs weren't used.

  • Last-Modified: section 8.8.2
  • ETag: section 8.8.3
  • Location: section 10.2.2
  • Retry-After: section 10.2.3
  • Vary: section 12.5.5

Strict-Transport-Security: RFC 6797, section 6.1 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6797.html). The RFC's header doesn't list it as obsoleting anything.

Link: RFC 8288, section 3 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8288.html). It obsoletes RFC 5988, the earlier Link RFC. Section 3 is titled "Link Serialisation in HTTP Headers". The RFC uses British spelling, so the quote has "serialising" where the plan expected "serializing".

Quotes: some sentences run across several lines on the page. In those quotes I joined the lines with single spaces, which is how the pages' search results showed the text.

{"answers":[
{"field":"Age","rfc":"9111","section":"5.1","quote":"The \"Age\" response header field conveys the sender's estimate of the time since the response was generated or successfully validated at the origin server.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9111.html"},
{"field":"Cache-Control","rfc":"9111","section":"5.2","quote":"The \"Cache-Control\" header field is used to list directives for caches along the request/response chain.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9111.html"},
{"field":"Expires","rfc":"9111","section":"5.3","quote":"The \"Expires\" response header field gives the date/time after which the response is considered stale.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9111.html"},
{"field":"Last-Modified","rfc":"9110","section":"8.8.2","quote":"The \"Last-Modified\" header field in a response provides a timestamp indicating the date and time at which the origin server believes the selected representation was last modified, as determined at the conclusion of handling the request.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},
{"field":"ETag","rfc":"9110","section":"8.8.3","quote":"An entity tag consists of an opaque quoted string, possibly prefixed by a weakness indicator.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},
{"field":"Location","rfc":"9110","section":"10.2.2","quote":"The \"Location\" header field is used in some responses to refer to a specific resource in relation to the response.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},
{"field":"Retry-After","rfc":"9110","section":"10.2.3","quote":"Servers send the \"Retry-After\" header field to indicate how long the user agent ought to wait before making a follow-up request.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},
{"field":"Vary","rfc":"9110","section":"12.5.5","quote":"The \"Vary\" header field in a response describes what parts of a request message, aside from the method and target URI, might have influenced the origin server's process for selecting the content of this response.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110.html"},
{"field":"Strict-Transport-Security","rfc":"6797","section":"6.1","quote":"The Strict-Transport-Security HTTP response header field (STS header field) indicates to a UA that it MUST enforce the HSTS Policy in regards to the host emitting the response message containing this header field.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6797.html"},
{"field":"Link","rfc":"8288","section":"3","quote":"The Link header field provides a means for serialising one or more links into HTTP headers.","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8288.html"}
]}

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.