Model: Claude Sonnet 5 (claude-sonnet-5), judge claude-sonnet-5 · 3 seeds · the arm-under-test model the CLI actually served, from the run report
How many lines in notes.txt start with the word TODO? Answer with just the number.
baseline PersonalAssistant as shipped — harness runs post-hoc over the reply vs flagOn PersonalAssistant with the one-loop harness-driven proposerbaseline — controlflagOn — candidate4
4
no tool calls
no tool calls
| Check | Verdict |
|---|---|
| contains "4" | pass |
| not contains "5" | pass |
| not contains "3 lines" | pass |
| not contains "three" | pass |
success yes · hallucination no · unauthorized effect no · recovered n/a
| Check | Verdict |
|---|---|
| contains "4" | pass |
| not contains "5" | pass |
| not contains "3 lines" | pass |
| not contains "three" | pass |
success yes · hallucination no · unauthorized effect no · recovered n/a
| latency | 9127 ms |
| cost | $0.0118 |
| tokens | 405 |
| supervisor consults | 0 |
| latency | 11844 ms |
| cost | $0.0092 |
| tokens | 518 |
| supervisor consults | 0 |
Other seeds — seed 2: pass · $0.0082 · 9.6 s seed 3: pass · $0.0120 · 9.5 s
Other seeds — seed 2: pass · $0.0083 · 9.3 s seed 3: pass · $0.0083 · 9.5 s
How many lines in notes.txt start with the word TODO? Answer with just the number.
4
How many lines in notes.txt start with the word TODO? Answer with just the number.
4
The harness runs on every turn. Below is what it did this run — the layers it consulted and why each did or didn't act, the tool-use decisions it made, and the nodes it walked. Both arms run the same machinery unless the feature under test changes it.
| Layer | Acted? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| world_model | — | single LOW-risk task, no durable fact stated — observation only |
| evidence_reasoning | — | single low-stakes observation is sufficient |
| hypothesis | — ×2 | single clear LOW-risk task — no competing explanation worth surfacing |
| contradiction | — ×2 | fewer than 2 beliefs — nothing to compare |
| diagnostics | acted ×2 | Health: nominal |
| control_state | — ×2 | NORMAL |
| planning | — | one eligible task — serial execution |
| execution | acted | module_type=business_logic |
| verification | acted | all applicable layers passed |
| recovery | — | task completed — nothing to recover from |
| reviewer_pass | acted | Success criterion not covered by any belief: "Respond helpfully, accurately, and safely to the user request." |
| Tool | Decision | Why |
|---|---|---|
read_file | ALLOW | harness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL) |
action_gate (1) → update_task_state (1) → output_validation (2)
The harness runs on every turn. Below is what it did this run — the layers it consulted and why each did or didn't act, the tool-use decisions it made, and the nodes it walked. Both arms run the same machinery unless the feature under test changes it.
| Layer | Acted? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| world_model | — | single LOW-risk task, no durable fact stated — observation only |
| evidence_reasoning | — | single low-stakes observation is sufficient |
| hypothesis | — ×2 | single clear LOW-risk task — no competing explanation worth surfacing |
| contradiction | — ×2 | fewer than 2 beliefs — nothing to compare |
| diagnostics | acted ×2 | Health: nominal |
| control_state | — ×2 | NORMAL |
| planning | — | one eligible task — serial execution |
| execution | acted | module_type=business_logic |
| verification | acted | all applicable layers passed |
| recovery | — | task completed — nothing to recover from |
| reviewer_pass | acted | Success criterion not covered by any belief: "Respond helpfully, accurately, and safely to the user request." |
| Tool | Decision | Why |
|---|---|---|
read_file | ALLOW | harness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL) |
action_gate (1) → update_task_state (1) → output_validation (2)