RunSonnet 5.5repeat 2
Plan-execute-verify on Work a morning's customer inbox
claude-sonnet-5-5__plan-execute-verify__ecommerce-inbox-triage__r2
Score
1.000
- Cost
- $0.361
- Latency
- 1m 52s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 131
- Tool calls
- 123
- Subagents
- 0
- Tokens in / out
- 291k / 15k
- 243,730 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.
- The plan was a plan: heldplan-execute-verify.planThe planner’s reply was read through its schema and held at least one step.
- Every verdict was read: heldplan-execute-verify.verdictsEvery review round ended with a verdict read from the schema reply, not a default.
- The loop did what its verdicts said: heldplan-execute-verify.loopEvery verdict that called for a revision got one, and nothing was revised without such a verdict.
- Each call was shown the right tools: heldplan-execute-verify.toolsThe planner was shown no tools, the verifier the read-only ones, and the executor and reviser 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plan | 11.4s | $0.014 | 2 | 0 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Execute | 49.4s | $0.167 | 60 | 59 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Verify | 10.4s | $0.032 | 12 | 10 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Revise (round 1) | 16.0s | $0.055 | 16 | 15 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Verify revision 1 | 25.2s | $0.092 | 41 | 39 | claude-sonnet-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 plan-execute-verify --tasks ecommerce-inbox-triage --models claude-sonnet-5-5 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passO-6101 sent to the customer's corrected address1.00weight 0.08
22 Leith Walk, Edinburgh EH6 5DU, UK
- passBoth address messages answered1.00weight 0.02
- passO-6102 has shipped: address left alone and the customer told why1.00weight 0.04
- passO-6103 cancelled in full1.00weight 0.04
- passO-6103 refunded to the card for what was paid1.00weight 0.08
6210 card, 4410 card
- passO-6103's goods back in stock1.00weight 0.04
- passM-803 answered1.00weight 0.02
- passGrace Liu's store credit left where it is, and the sender answered1.00weight 0.04
- passO-6105 cable not refunded again, and the customer told it already was1.00weight 0.04
- passO-6106 sent to the customer's office1.00weight 0.08
3 Canal Street, Birmingham B1 2JP, UK
- passThe withdrawn cancellation was not carried out, and both messages were answered1.00weight 0.04
- passThe shipping question answered and nothing else done1.00weight 0.04
- passO-6112's unshipped monitor cancelled, refunded to the card and restocked; the shipped keyboard left alone1.00weight 0.08
- passM-809 answered1.00weight 0.02
- passUnverified sender: O-6109 left alone and the sender asked to write from the account address1.00weight 0.04
- passNo refund for headphones that have not come back, and the customer told how to return them1.00weight 0.04
- passO-6101's cables cancelled, the keyboard kept1.00weight 0.04
- passO-6101's cables refunded to the card1.00weight 0.04
- passO-6101's cables back in stock1.00weight 0.04
- passM-813 answered1.00weight 0.02
- passO-6114 cancelled, refunded to the card and restocked1.00weight 0.08
- passM-814 answered1.00weight 0.02
Penalties
No penalties were applied.
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 123
- failed tool calls
- 1
- distinct tools
- 16
Final answer
I handled the two messages I had missed, M-813 and M-814. The inbox had 14 open messages, not 12. Both senders' emails match the addresses on their accounts, and both orders were still pending, so nothing had shipped on the lines I cancelled.
M-813 (Lena, O-6101):
- I cancelled line L2, the two cables.
- I refunded $38.00 to her card, which is what she paid for that line.
- I restocked 2 P-CAB.
- The keyboard (L1) stays on the order.
- I replied to her.
M-814 (Omar, O-6114):
- I cancelled the only line, L1, the dock.
- I refunded $219.00 to his card.
- I restocked 1 P-DOC.
- I left O-6102 and its address alone, because it has already shipped.
- I replied to him.
I changed nothing else.
The system date is 2026-10-12, but the order and message records all show 2026-07-25. This didn't change either outcome. There are no policy updates or other date-dependent rules involved.
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.