RunSonnet 5.5repeat 2
Plan-execute on Share two short deliveries out among backorders
claude-sonnet-5-5__plan-execute__ecommerce-backorder-allocation__r2
Score
0.872
- Cost
- $0.253
- Latency
- 1m 14s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 74
- Tool calls
- 71
- Subagents
- 0
- Tokens in / out
- 252k / 11k
- 225,251 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.planThe planner’s reply was read through its schema and held at least one step.
- Each call was shown the right tools: heldplan-execute.toolsThe planner was shown no tools and the executor the task’s 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 | 9.5s | $0.021 | 2 | 0 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Execute | 1m 5s | $0.232 | 72 | 71 | 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 --tasks ecommerce-backorder-allocation --models claude-sonnet-5-5 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passO-5201 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5201: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5202 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
- passO-5202: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5203 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5203: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5204 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5204: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5206 left waiting, with a promise date1.00weight 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 them1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-14, L2@2026-08-14
- passO-5206: customer told once, with the promised date1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5207 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
- passO-5207: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- failO-5208 allocated from the delivery0.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-05
- passO-5208: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5209 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5209: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5210 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=pending
- passO-5210: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5211 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending L2=shipped
- passO-5211: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- failO-5212 allocated from the delivery0.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-05
- passO-5212: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5213 left waiting, with a promise date1.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-14
- passO-5213 waiting lines promised for the date the in-transit supply gives them1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-14
- passO-5213: customer told once, with the promised date1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5214 left waiting, with a promise date1.00weight 0.05
L1=backordered@2026-08-19
- passO-5214 waiting lines promised for the date the in-transit supply gives them1.00weight 0.03
expected L1@2026-08-19
- passO-5214: customer told once, with the promised date1.00weight 0.01
- passO-5215 allocated from the delivery1.00weight 0.05
L1=pending
- passO-5215: customer told once that the order is allocated1.00weight 0.01
- failBoth deliveries were allocated in full0.00weight 0.03
P-DOC stock=0, P-MON stock=3
Penalties
No penalties were applied.
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 71
- failed tool calls
- 1
- distinct tools
- 10
Final answer
I worked the P-DOC and P-MON backorders and notified 14 customers. The risk-hold order O-5205 was left untouched, with no allocation, promise date or message. I didn't re-read the orders afterwards. The inventory read after the first allocations showed the expected stock levels.
Priority. PU-12 applies today, which is 2026-07-25 in the system (the prompt's 2026-10-06 doesn't match it). It puts orders placed 14 or more days ago first, oldest first. PU-9 expired on 2026-06-30, so I ignored it. The order was O-5201, 5202, 5203, 5204, then the rest by tier and date.
New stock. PO-91 (4 docks) was received while I was working, so I re-checked and allocated those 4 too under the same rules. That goes slightly beyond the PO-88/PO-89 you named. I judged the received stock should not sit idle while lines were waiting.
Allocated (full lines):
- P-DOC (11 units): O-5201 L1 (2), O-5202 L2 (1), O-5204 L1 (2), O-5207 L1 (1), O-5210 L1 (1), O-5209 L1 (2), O-5211 L1 (1), O-5215 L1 (1).
- P-MON (4 units): O-5202 L1 (1), O-5203 L1 (2), O-5207 L2 (1).
- Ship-complete O-5207: both of its lines could be allocated at once, so it went through.
Waiting, with promise dates:
- O-5206 (ship-complete): its USB-C Hub line (L2) has no stock, so the whole order waits. L1 (dock) and L2 (hub) are both promised 2026-08-14, the latest of their own dates. The dock line would get 08-14 from PO-95, and the hub line would get 08-06 from PO-90. I also set the date on the hub line because it is on the same ship-complete order.
- O-5213 L1 (dock x2): 2026-08-14, from PO-95.
- O-5208 L1 (monitor x2): 2026-08-05, from PO-93.
- O-5212 L1 (monitor x1): 2026-08-05, from PO-93.
- O-5214 L1 (monitor x1): 2026-08-19, from PO-97.
Notices. Each customer got one notice, after their lines were allocated or promised. I didn't reply to any inbox messages, since none were part of this task.
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.