RunOpus 5.5repeat 1
Propose-select on Consolidate duplicate CRM reports
claude-opus-5-5__propose-select__support-medium__r1
Score
1.000
- Cost
- $0.472
- Latency
- 1m 9s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 58
- Tool calls
- 52
- Subagents
- 3
- Tokens in / out
- 143k / 12k
- 106,007 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) | 23.5s | $0.086 | 13 | 12 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Proposal 2 (state-first) | 24.7s | $0.091 | 13 | 12 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Proposal 3 (outcome-first) | 22.2s | $0.087 | 13 | 12 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Select | 20.1s | $0.080 | 2 | 0 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| Execute | 24.4s | $0.127 | 17 | 16 | 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 support-medium --models claude-opus-5-5 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passSurvivor carries the earliest SLA deadline of the merged set1.00weight 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 ticket1.00weight 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 survivor1.00weight 0.15
T-1061 links=[T-1052]
- passSurvivor re-graded from the matrix for its widened impact scope1.00weight 0.15
severity=sev2 (matrix says sev2)
- passSurvivor assigned to the engineer on call for the owning rotation at its deadline1.00weight 0.15
assignee=E-201 (expected E-201)
- passEvery ticket folded in was read before the merge1.00weight 0.08
Penalties
No penalties were applied.
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 52
- failed tool calls
- 0
- distinct tools
- 11
Final answer
The three reports of the CRM search outage are now one ticket, T-1052, graded sev2 and assigned to Ines Kovac (E-201). I re-checked every ticket, the CRM severity table, the on-call schedule and the knowledge base articles first, and they matched the plan.
What I changed
- Merged T-1053 and T-1054 into T-1052. All three report the same CRM account search error (HTTP 500). Knowledge base article KB-23 says every failing-search report is one incident, caused by a corrupt search index. T-1052 was created first (07:05Z), so it is the ticket that stays open.
- Deadline is now 2026-03-17T12:40Z. It was 15:05Z on T-1052. When tickets are merged, the remaining one must carry the earliest deadline promised on any of them, which was T-1053's 12:40Z. The handbook also says a promised deadline is never moved earlier, which seems to conflict. I followed the merge rule because 12:40Z had already been promised to T-1053's requester, and no requester's deadline got later.
- Severity is now sev2. The merge carried over T-1053's impact (the whole department), and the CRM table gives sev2 for that. The deadline did not change.
- Assigned to E-201 Ines Kovac. CRM belongs to the business-apps rotation, and she is on call there from 08:00 to 20:00Z, which covers the 12:40Z deadline. T-1053 had been assigned to Tomas Lindqvist (E-202), who is not on call then, so that assignment wasn't kept.
- The link moved over automatically. T-1052 and T-1061 now point at each other. I also added a comment to T-1052 recording the merge and the reasons.
What I left alone
- T-1055 (CSV export gives an empty file): this is a different problem. The requester says search works fine for them, and KB-24 says export reports must be tracked separately.
- T-1061 (engineering's ticket for the search index rebuild): it tracks the fix rather than reporting the outage, so I didn't merge it.
- Nothing was closed. T-1052 can't be closed while T-1061 is still open.
- Nothing was escalated, because you asked for grading and assignment only. If you want it escalated, sev2 goes to whoever is on call for the platform-primary rotation at 12:40Z.
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.