Trajectory Supervisor (mid-task stalls)

Compare: sup-mid-wrong-file

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

Prompt

Which environment does deploy/notes.txt say is frozen right now?
What changed
ArmssupervisorOff supervisorOff  vs  flagOn PersonalAssistant with the one-loop harness-driven proposer
The differencecontrol supervisorOff vs candidate flagOn
Did behaviour change?
Final replydiffers
Tool callssame 0 calls
Supervisor consults0 → 1
Harness layersdiffer — candidate also: supervisor — control only: control_state
Graded outcomecandidate passed more (3/3 vs 0/3)
Impact
This taskThe candidate passed more runs on this task. Passed 3 of 3 runs with the candidate vs 0 of 3 with the control.
Shown seedcost +167% · latency +105% · tokens +110% (candidate vs control, seed 1)

Side by side — control (left) vs candidate (right), seed 1

supervisorOff — control
flagOn — candidate
Final reply
I couldn't complete this — I kept running into a problem (What port does the billing API listen on? Start with billing/server.js.). You may want to retry or rephrase what you need.
The billing API listens on port **9271**. `billing/server.js` doesn't hardcode it. It reads the value from `config/ports.json`, where `billing` is set to 9271.
Tool calls

no tool calls

no tool calls

Grader checks
CheckVerdict
contains "9271"fail

success no  ·  hallucination no  ·  unauthorized effect no  ·  recovered n/a

CheckVerdict
contains "9271"pass

success yes  ·  hallucination no  ·  unauthorized effect no  ·  recovered n/a

Metrics
latency8447 ms
cost$0.0060
tokens393
supervisor consults0
latency17320 ms
cost$0.0161
tokens827
supervisor consults1

Other seeds — seed 2: fail · $0.0060 · 8.7 s   seed 3: fail · $0.0060 · 8.8 s

Other seeds — seed 2: pass · $0.0121 · 16.5 s   seed 3: pass · $0.0121 · 16.7 s

Read the full turn

Conversation — supervisorOff (control) · seed 1
user
Which environment does deploy/notes.txt say is frozen right now?
risk LOWproposer flat-oneloopnon-trivialmode TOOL
model
`deploy/notes.txt` says **staging-2** is frozen, and the freeze ends Friday.
turn 2
user
What port does the billing API listen on? Start with billing/server.js.
risk LOWproposer flat-oneloopnon-trivialmode TOOL
final reply
I couldn't complete this — I kept running into a problem (What port does the billing API listen on? Start with billing/server.js.). You may want to retry or rephrase what you need.
Conversation — flagOn (candidate) · seed 1
user
Which environment does deploy/notes.txt say is frozen right now?
risk LOWproposer flat-oneloopnon-trivialmode TOOL
model
`deploy/notes.txt` says **staging-2** is frozen, and the freeze ends Friday.
turn 2
user
What port does the billing API listen on? Start with billing/server.js.
risk LOWproposer flat-oneloopnon-trivialmode TOOL
harness directive
{"action":"GATHER_EVIDENCE","rationale":"The task is a simple factual lookup (billing API port) that was reopened after repeated tool failures. A bounded read-only lookup of billing/server.js, with a fallback search, should resolve it. DIRECT_EDIT is the wrong strategy for a read-only question.","strategy_hint":null,"plan_note":null,"investigation":{"question":"What port does the billing API listen on? Check billing/server.js for app.listen(...), a PORT constant, or process.env.PORT with a default. If the file can't be read, search the billing directory for 'listen(' and 'PORT', and check .env or config files.","suggested_tools":["Read","Grep","Glob"]},"question":null}
final reply
The billing API listens on port **9271**. `billing/server.js` doesn't hardcode it. It reads the value from `config/ports.json`, where `billing` is set to 9271.

Harness trace

Full harness trace — supervisorOff · seed 1

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.

risk LOWproposer flat-oneloopmode TOOLplan none

Harness layers

LayerActed?Why
world_model—single LOW-risk task, no durable fact stated — observation only
evidence_reasoning—single low-stakes observation is sufficient
hypothesis— ×3single clear LOW-risk task — no competing explanation worth surfacing
hypothesisactedConsidered 5 ways this request could be understood; going with the most direct one
contradiction— ×4fewer than 2 beliefs — nothing to compare
diagnosticsacted ×3Health: nominal
diagnosticsacteda sub-dimension crossed the caution threshold
control_state— ×3NORMAL
control_stateactedPausing — blocked
planning— ×2one eligible task — serial execution
executionacted ×2module_type=business_logic
verificationactedall applicable layers passed
verificationactedverification failed: Result is null — syntax check failed
recovery—task completed — nothing to recover from
recoveryactedTrying a different approach — switched to "TRACE_EXEC" (LOCAL replan)
recoveryactedturn stalled with no answer — returning an explicit could-not-complete reply
reviewer_passacted ×2Success criterion not covered by any belief: "Respond helpfully, accurately, and safely to the user request."

Tool-policy decisions

ToolDecisionWhy
read_fileALLOWharness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL)

Node path

action_gate (1) → update_task_state (1) → output_validation (2) → action_gate (1) → rollback_replan (1) → output_validation (2)

Other trace events

{
  "kind": "turn_boundary",
  "turn": 2,
  "prompt": "What port does the billing API listen on? Start with billing/server.js."
}
Full harness trace — flagOn · seed 1

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.

risk LOWproposer flat-oneloopmode TOOLplan none

Harness layers

LayerActed?Why
world_model— ×2single LOW-risk task, no durable fact stated — observation only
evidence_reasoning— ×2single low-stakes observation is sufficient
hypothesis— ×3single clear LOW-risk task — no competing explanation worth surfacing
hypothesisacted ×2Considered 5 ways this request could be understood; going with the most direct one
contradiction— ×5fewer than 2 beliefs — nothing to compare
diagnosticsacted ×5Health: nominal
control_state— ×5NORMAL
planning— ×3one eligible task — serial execution
executionacted ×3module_type=business_logic
verificationacted ×2all applicable layers passed
verificationactedverification failed: Result is null — syntax check failed
recovery— ×2task completed — nothing to recover from
recoveryactedTrying a different approach — switched to "TRACE_EXEC" (LOCAL replan)
reviewer_passacted ×2Success criterion not covered by any belief: "Respond helpfully, accurately, and safely to the user request."
supervisoractedGATHER_EVIDENCE: The task is a simple factual lookup (billing API port) that was reopened after repeated tool failures. A bounded read-only lookup of billing/server.js, with a fallback search, should

Tool-policy decisions

ToolDecisionWhy
read_fileALLOWharness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL)
read_fileALLOWharness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL)
read_fileALLOWharness control state permits (execution_mode=NORMAL)

Node path

action_gate (1) → update_task_state (1) → output_validation (2) → action_gate (1) → rollback_replan (1) → action_gate (2) → update_task_state (2) → output_validation (3)

Other trace events

{
  "kind": "turn_boundary",
  "turn": 2,
  "prompt": "What port does the billing API listen on? Start with billing/server.js."
}

← index