RunSonnet 5.5repeat 1
Propose-select on Audit a week of baggage fees
claude-sonnet-5-5__propose-select__airline-baggage-audit__r1
Score
1.000
- Cost
- $0.782
- Latency
- 2m 1s
- setup 0.0s, grading 0.0s
- Turns
- 311
- Tool calls
- 305
- Subagents
- 3
- Tokens in / out
- 529k / 36k
- 436,200 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) | 52.0s | $0.182 | 76 | 75 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Proposal 2 (state-first) | 48.9s | $0.160 | 69 | 68 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Proposal 3 (outcome-first) | 54.6s | $0.183 | 81 | 80 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Select | 14.4s | $0.052 | 2 | 0 | claude-sonnet-5-5 |
| Execute | 52.4s | $0.205 | 83 | 82 | 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 propose-select --tasks airline-baggage-audit --models claude-sonnet-5-5 --repeats 1
Score breakdown
- passL2 (R8124): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL2: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL3 (R8125): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 12000 of an expected 12000
- passL3: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL4 (R8112): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL4: audit outcome recorded as undercharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL5 (R8116): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 5500 of an expected 5500
- passL5: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL6 (R8117): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL6: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL7 (R8118): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 4500 of an expected 4500
- passL7: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL8 (R8120): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL8: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL9 (R8126): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL9: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL10 (R8113): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 7500 of an expected 7500
- passL10: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL11 (R8115): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL11: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL12 (R8122): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL12: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL13 (R8123): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL13: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL15 (R8119): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 2500 of an expected 2500
- passL15: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL16 (R8110): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL16: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL17 (R8111): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL17: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL18 (R8114): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL18: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
- passL19 (R8114): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 5000 of an expected 5000
- passL19: audit outcome recorded as overcharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL20 (R8121): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL20: audit outcome recorded as undercharged1.00weight 0.02
- passL21 (R8122): audited, and refunded exactly the overcharge, if any1.00weight 0.04
refunded 0 of an expected 0
- passL21: audit outcome recorded as correct1.00weight 0.02
Penalties
No penalties were applied.
Scorer metadata
- tool calls
- 305
- failed tool calls
- 0
- distinct tools
- 12
Final answer
I audited all 19 baggage fees posted 2026-07-20 to 07-26 (L2–L13 and L15–L21). I refunded six overcharges and annotated every entry. The six refunds went to the original payment method.
Overcharges refunded:
| Entry | Reservation | Refund (cents) | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| L3 | R8125 | 12000 | Gold on 07-20 gave 3 free bags, so no fee was due. |
| L5 | R8116 | 5500 | Silver economy with 3 bags owed 4500 and was charged 12000, an overcharge of 7500. L24 had already refunded 2000, so 5500 brings the total to exactly 7500. |
| L7 | R8118 | 4500 | Silver economy with 2 bags, both free. |
| L10 | R8113 | 7500 | Silver basic with 2 bags owed 4500 and was charged 12000. |
| L15 | R8119 | 2500 | Gold basic with 3 bags owed 5000 (the new rate from 07-23) and was charged 7500. |
| L19 | R8114 | 5000 | Duplicate of L18 for the same 3 bags, refunded in full. |
Undercharges: I annotated L4 (R8112) and L20 (R8121) as undercharged and did not re-bill either.
- L4 owed 12000 and was charged 9000.
- L20 owed 5000 and was charged 4500.
Correct: L2, L6, L8, L9, L11, L12, L13, L16, L17, L18 and L21.
- L21 adds a different bag to R8122, so it is not a duplicate of L12.
I judged each fee on the cabin and tier the passenger had on the posting date, and used the bulletin rate for fees from 07-23. Bulletin PB-2026-13 raises the first chargeable bag from 4500 to 5000 from 2026-07-23.
Things to know:
- Payment instrument:
get_payment_statusshows "no payment instrument on file" for all six refunded reservations. The handbook says to issue travel credit instead when the instrument is not active. I usedrefund_feeanyway, because the audit rules call for refunds to the original payment method,refund_feeaccepted all six, and L24 was posted the same way. If Finance sees these refunds fail to settle, those six may need reissuing as travel credit. - L13 reasoning: it is correct, but not for the reason the plan gave. R8123 is silver, so it had 2 free bags in economy and owed 4500 for the third bag.
- Passenger notifications: I did not message any passengers or resolve any requests, because the task didn't ask for that.
- Out of scope: I did not touch L14, L22, L23 or L24.
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.