RunOpus 5.5repeat 2

Single on Share two short deliveries out among backorders

claude-opus-5-5__single__ecommerce-backorder-allocation__r2

Score

1.000

passed

design ran as designed

Cost: $0.536
Latency: 1m 49s; setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
Turns: 80
Tool calls: 79
Subagents: 0
Tokens in / out: 425k / 11k; 394,262 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.
Each call was shown the right tools: heldsingle.toolsThe agent was shown exactly the task’s tools, none missing and none extra.

Phases

Spend$0.536

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

Phase	Duration	Cost	Turns	Tools	Model
Main	1m 49s	$0.536	80	79	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 single --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: 79
failed tool calls: 0
distinct tools: 10

Final answer

I've worked the dock and monitor backorders: 14 lines are allocated, 4 lines that are still waiting have promise dates, and 14 customers have been notified. Two more supplier deliveries were marked received while I worked: PO-91 (4 docks) and PO-93 (3 monitors). The task only named PO-88 and PO-89, but the handbook says all received stock goes to backorders in priority order, so I allocated these too. Without them the waiting lines would have been promised later dates while the units sat on the shelf.

How I ranked orders. The store system's date is 2026-07-25, not the 2026-10-06 in my own context, and I used the store's date. That matters: if 2026-10-06 were "today", every order would count as aged and priority would follow order date alone. One policy update (PU-12) applies from 1 July: orders placed 14 or more days ago (on or before 2026-07-11) go first, oldest first. Everyone else follows by tier (platinum, gold, standard), then earliest order. The other update (PU-9, gold ranked with platinum) only covered June, so I didn't apply it.

Allocated (stock set aside, ready for the warehouse to ship):

Docks (11 units, now 0 left): O-5201 (2), O-5202 L2 (1), O-5204 (2), O-5207 L1 (1), O-5210 (1), O-5209 (2), O-5211 (1), O-5215 (1)
Monitors (7 units, now 0 left): O-5202 L1 (1), O-5203 (2), O-5207 L2 (1), O-5208 (2), O-5212 (1)
O-5207 has to ship as one parcel, and both its lines could be filled together, so both were allocated.

Still waiting, with promise dates:

O-5206: this order also has to ship as one parcel, and its USB-C hub line has no stock, so its dock line waited too. The dock comes from PO-95 (2026-08-14) and the hub from PO-90 (2026-08-06). Both lines are promised for the later date, 2026-08-14.
O-5213: needs 2 docks; only 1 was left when its turn came, so it waits for PO-95, promised 2026-08-14. The last dock went to O-5215, next in line.
O-5214: monitor from PO-97, promised 2026-08-19.

Left alone: O-5205 (1 dock) is on risk hold, so it got no stock, no promise date and no message.

Customers: each of the 14 other orders got one message, sent after its lines were allocated or promised. Orders ready to ship were told so; the three waiting orders were given their expected ship date.

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.