RunOpus 5.5repeat 1
Propose-select on Audit a week of baggage fees
claude-opus-5-5__propose-select__airline-baggage-audit__r1
Score
1.000
- Cost
- $1.47
- Latency
- 2m 41s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 280
- Tool calls
- 274
- Subagents
- 3
- Tokens in / out
- 711k / 35k
- 618,100 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.
- All three proposers ran: heldpropose-select.proposalsThree proposers ran in parallel, each from its own angle, and none was starved while another ran.
- The selector chose: heldpropose-select.selectionThe selector picked a proposal by a valid number, read from its schema reply and not a default.
- Each call was shown the right tools: heldpropose-select.toolsEach proposer was shown the read-only tools, the selector none, and the executor 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proposal 1 (policy-first) | 1m 15s | $0.350 | 71 | 70 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Proposal 2 (state-first) | 1m 18s | $0.355 | 71 | 70 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Proposal 3 (outcome-first) | 1m 11s | $0.335 | 70 | 69 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Select | 23.7s | $0.112 | 2 | 0 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Execute | 59.5s | $0.319 | 66 | 65 | 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 propose-select --tasks airline-baggage-audit --models claude-opus-5-5 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passL2 (R8124): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL2: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL3 (R8125): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 12000 of an expected 12000
- passL3: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL4 (R8112): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL4: audit outcome recorded as undercharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL5 (R8116): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 5500 of an expected 5500
- passL5: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL6 (R8117): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL6: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL7 (R8118): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 4500 of an expected 4500
- passL7: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL8 (R8120): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL8: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL9 (R8126): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL9: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL10 (R8113): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 7500 of an expected 7500
- passL10: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL11 (R8115): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL11: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL12 (R8122): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL12: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL13 (R8123): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL13: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL15 (R8119): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 2500 of an expected 2500
- passL15: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL16 (R8110): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL16: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL17 (R8111): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL17: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL18 (R8114): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL18: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL19 (R8114): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 5000 of an expected 5000
- passL19: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL20 (R8121): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL20: audit outcome recorded as undercharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL21 (R8122): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL21: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
Penalties
No penalties were applied.
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 274
- failed tool calls
- 0
- distinct tools
- 11
Final answer
I audited all 19 baggage fees posted from 2026-07-20 to 2026-07-26. 11 were correct, 2 were undercharged and 6 were overcharged, and I refunded the 6 overcharges for 37,000 cents in total.
Before changing anything I re-checked the plan against the system: the 19 entries, the baggage rules, bulletin PB-2026-13, the reservations involved, their change histories and the passengers' tier histories. Everything matched. Each fee was judged by the rules on the day it was charged, using the passenger's cabin and tier that day. From 2026-07-23, PB-2026-13 raises the first chargeable bag from 4,500 to 5,000 cents.
Correct (11): L2, L6, L8, L9, L11, L12, L13, L16, L17, L18, L21. Some of these only look wrong if you go by today's records:
- R8120 and R8123 moved to premium economy only after their fees were charged.
- Tara Singh (L6) became gold and Quinn Harper (L9) became silver only on 07-22, the day after their fees.
- L21 is a charge for one new bag, not a second charge for the same bags.
Undercharged (2), not re-billed, as the rules require:
- L4 (R8112): charged 9,000, should have been 12,000.
- L20 (R8121): charged 4,500, should have been 5,000 under the new price. The marking tool has no note field, so I couldn't add the plan's "not re-billed" note to L4 or L20.
Overcharged (6), each marked and refunded to the original payment method:
| Fee | Reservation | Refund (cents) | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| L3 | R8125 | 12,000 | Passenger was still gold on 07-20, so all 3 bags were free (L25) |
| L5 | R8116 | 5,500 | Overcharged by 7,500, but a 2,000 courtesy refund (L24) had already gone back, so they now pay exactly the correct 4,500 (L26) |
| L7 | R8118 | 4,500 | Economy plus silver allows 2 free bags (L27) |
| L10 | R8113 | 7,500 | Basic economy plus silver: only 1 bag was chargeable, at 4,500 (L28) |
| L15 | R8119 | 2,500 | Basic economy plus gold: 1 bag chargeable at the new 5,000 price (L29) |
| L19 | R8114 | 5,000 | Second charge for the same 3 bags already charged in L18 (L30) |
Payment method: the payment check for these bookings shows "no payment instrument on file", not an inactive card. The rules only switch refunds to travel credit when the card is inactive, so I refunded to the original payment method, and the system accepted all six refunds. Because none went out as travel credit, I didn't send the customers any message.
I didn't touch fees outside the date window (L1, L23), the change fees (L14, L22), the earlier courtesy refund (L24), or any other booking or passenger record. No queue request is linked to this audit, so there was nothing to resolve.
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.