RunOpus 5.5repeat 2

Propose-select on Share two short deliveries out among backorders

claude-opus-5-5__propose-select__ecommerce-backorder-allocation__r2

Score

1.000

passed

design ran as designed

Cost: $1.48
Latency: 3m 1s; setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
Turns: 211
Tool calls: 205
Subagents: 3
Tokens in / out: 732k / 33k; 632,251 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.
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

Spend$1.48

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)	54.3s	$0.276	44	43	claude-opus-5-5
Proposal 2 (state-first)	57.3s	$0.283	44	43	claude-opus-5-5
Proposal 3 (outcome-first)	1m 1s	$0.290	43	42	claude-opus-5-5
Select	25.5s	$0.129	2	0	claude-opus-5-5
Execute	1m 35s	$0.498	78	77	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 ecommerce-backorder-allocation --models claude-opus-5-5 --repeats 1

Score breakdown

passO-5201 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
passO-5201: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5202 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
passO-5202: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5203 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
passO-5203: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5204 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
passO-5204: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5206 left waiting, with a promise date
1.00weight 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 them
1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-14, L2@2026-08-14
passO-5206: customer told once, with the promised date
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5207 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
passO-5207: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5208 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
passO-5208: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5209 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
passO-5209: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5210 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
passO-5210: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5211 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=shipped
passO-5211: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5212 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
passO-5212: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5213 left waiting, with a promise date
1.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-14
passO-5213 waiting lines promised for the date the in-transit supply gives them
1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-14
passO-5213: customer told once, with the promised date
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5214 left waiting, with a promise date
1.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-19
passO-5214 waiting lines promised for the date the in-transit supply gives them
1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-19
passO-5214: customer told once, with the promised date
1.00weight 0.01
passO-5215 allocated from the delivery
1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
passO-5215: customer told once that the order is allocated
1.00weight 0.01
passBoth deliveries were allocated in full
1.00weight 0.03
P-DOC stock=0, P-MON stock=0

Penalties

No penalties were applied.

Scorer metadata

tool calls: 205
failed tool calls: 0
distinct tools: 11

Final answer

I've worked the dock and monitor backorders: 13 lines now have stock set aside, 4 have promise dates, and 14 customers have been notified. The result differs from the plan because two more supplier deliveries arrived while I was working: PO-91 (4 docks) and PO-93 (3 monitors). The plan had used both to set promise dates. Once stock is received, the backorder rules send it to waiting lines in priority order, so I allocated it instead.

Checks before starting: the store date is 2026-07-25, so PU-12 puts orders placed on or before 2026-07-11 first; PU-9 only covered June and didn't apply. O-5205 is on risk hold. O-5206 and O-5207 must ship complete. The customer tiers matched the plan.

Stock set aside, in priority order:

Docks (PO-88, 7 units): O-5201 ×2, O-5202, O-5204 ×2, O-5207, O-5210. O-5206 waited because its hub has no stock.
Monitors (PO-89, 4 units): O-5202, O-5203 ×2, O-5207. O-5207 got its dock and monitor together, as ship-complete requires.
Docks (PO-91, 4 units): O-5209 ×2, O-5211, O-5215. O-5213 needs 2 and only 1 was left, so it waits and the next line in priority got the unit.
Monitors (PO-93, 3 units): O-5208 ×2, O-5212.

Dock and monitor stock is now 0.

Promise dates for the lines still waiting:

Line	Comes from	Promise date
O-5206 dock and hub	PO-95 (docks, 2026-08-14) and PO-90 (hubs, 2026-08-06)	2026-08-14 for both; it ships complete, so both get the later date
O-5213 docks ×2	PO-95	2026-08-14
O-5214 monitor	PO-97	2026-08-19

Customer notices: each customer got one email, sent after their lines were allocated or dated. Orders O-5201–O-5204 and O-5207–O-5212 got a "set aside, ready to ship" notice, and so did O-5215. O-5206, O-5213 and O-5214 were told their promise dates.

Left alone:

O-5205 got no stock, no date and no message, because of the risk hold.
I didn't touch lines that weren't backordered: O-5206's cable, O-5210's keyboard, and O-5211's cable, which has already shipped.
The inbox was empty.

A last check found no further deliveries. The five lines still backordered are exactly the waiting ones above.

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.