ScaffoldBench

RunSonnet 5.5repeat 1

Plan-execute on Consolidate duplicate CRM reports

claude-sonnet-5-5__plan-execute__support-medium__r1

Score

0.846

wrong answer
design ran as designed
Cost
$0.084
Latency
32.6s
setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
Turns
19
Tool calls
16
Subagents
0
Tokens in / out
72k / 3.7k
61,084 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.
  • 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

Plan: 0.0s to 10.8s, finished, 0 tool calls, $0.015
Execute: 10.8s to 32.6s, finished, 16 tool calls, $0.068

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

PhaseDurationCostTurnsToolsModel
Plan10.8s$0.01520claude-sonnet-5-5
Execute21.7s$0.0681716claude-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

Record this cell yourself: npm run bench -- run --strategies plan-execute --tasks support-medium --models claude-sonnet-5-5 --repeats 1

Score breakdown

  • passSurvivor carries the earliest SLA deadline of the merged set
    1.00weight 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 ticket
    1.00weight 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 survivor
    1.00weight 0.15

    T-1061 links=[T-1052]

  • passSurvivor re-graded from the matrix for its widened impact scope
    1.00weight 0.15

    severity=sev2 (matrix says sev2)

  • failSurvivor assigned to the engineer on call for the owning rotation at its deadline
    0.00weight 0.15

    assignee=E-101 (expected E-201)

  • passEvery ticket folded in was read before the merge
    1.00weight 0.08

Penalties

No penalties were applied.

Scorer metadata

tool calls
16
failed tool calls
0
distinct tools
10

Final answer

I merged the three duplicate CRM search reports into T-1052. It's now sev2 and escalated to Dana Whitfield (E-101) on platform-primary. I re-read T-1052 afterwards and it shows the new severity, deadline and assignee. I didn't re-read T-1053 or T-1054, and I didn't check T-1055 or T-1061 after the merge.

  • What I merged: T-1052, T-1053 and T-1054 all report the same incident: account search returning a 500 error on every query, starting around 07:00. I kept T-1052 because it was created first.
  • Deadline: T-1052 now has the earliest deadline set on any of the three, 12:40Z, which came from T-1053. Nothing was moved earlier than a committed time. The merge also re-pointed T-1054's link to T-1061 onto T-1052.
  • Severity: The merged ticket covers the whole department, so the matrix gives sev2. Re-grading didn't change the deadline.
  • Assignment: The matrix sends sev2 to platform-primary. Dana Whitfield is the on-call engineer there at 12:40Z, so I escalated to her and she is now the assignee.
  • Policy conflict: The ownership rule says the owning rotation, business-apps, works the ticket. The escalation rule says sev2 goes to platform-primary. I followed the escalation rule, so the ticket now sits with an engineer outside business-apps. The business-apps on-call at 12:40Z is Ines Kovac (E-201), if you'd rather have her.

  • Left alone:

    • T-1055 (CSV export gives an empty file) is a different problem. The requester says search works fine for them.
    • T-1061 is the engineering tracking ticket for the index rebuild, not a user report. It stays open and linked to T-1052.
  • Comment: I left a comment on T-1052 recording the merge, the deadline, the severity and the escalation.

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.