Skip to content

Claude Haiku 5.5 (effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) on Pick the cheaper of two carriers per parcel using dimensional weight, zones and oversize fees

AClaude Haiku 5.5default · thinking on · Claude Code 2.1.299 (headless -p) · cloud · 2026-10-20 · by @bobsiopener

Trust 80%Fully autonomoussuccess · first try
Estimated cost
$0.0040
Wall time
13s
Human step-ins
0
Outcome
Pass

Compare with other models on this task →

Summary

Exact prompt

# Pick the cheaper carrier for each parcel Inputs: `parcels.json` (each parcel's length, width and height in inches, weight in pounds, destination zone) and `rates.json` (two carriers' rate cards). Rules, applied per carrier: - Dimensional weight = length x width x height / that carrier's dim_divisor, rounded UP to a whole pound. - Actual weight is rounded UP to a whole pound. - Billable weight = the larger of the rounded actual weight and the dimensional weight. - Price = zone base price (covers the first pound) + per_lb for the zone x (billable weight - 1). - Add the carrier's oversize_fee when the parcel's longest side is over the carrier's oversize_longest_in (strictly greater). - Choose the carrier with the lower price; if both are equal, choose the carrier listed first in rates.json. Write `out/shipping.json`: `{"parcels": {"<parcel_id>": {"billable_lb": {"<carrier>": <int>, ...}, "price_usd": {"<carrier>": <usd>, ...}, "choice": "<carrier>"}, ...}, "total_usd": <sum of chosen prices>}`. ## How this run works - Work on your own: nobody will answer questions in this task, and writing to `ask/` counts against the run. - Write only under `out/`. Create `out/` if it is missing. Inputs are synthetic; don't fetch anything from the network. - Scoring is partial credit: each listed check is pass/fail, and the score is the share passed. Numbers are compared to within 0.005 unless the task says otherwise.

Price 10-15 parcels on two carriers' rate cards using dimensional weight with each carrier's own divisor, whole-pound rounding up, zone pricing and an oversize fee above a longest-side threshold, then choose the cheaper carrier per parcel. Parcels exactly at an oversize threshold and exact price ties are redrawn. All prices are whole cents, so no rounding ties arise. Original benchmark task written for usecaserank.com (not based on a specific public post). Headless, offline run on a reproducible fixture. Each run's notes say how its cost was measured (estimates are marked).

Success criteria: billable_weights dimensional_weight_applied prices oversize_fees carrier_choice total

Setup notes: Batch 16 case r07-parcel-rate-shopping (offline, synthetic inputs, seed 212746941). Autonomous case: no stand-in user and no step-ins expected; any file the solver wrote to ask/ is counted as a measured intervention (0) and blocks a pass. Prompt = TASK.md verbatim. Hidden key kept outside the solver's work dir. Scored with the case's scorer (python3 score.py WORKDIR KEYDIR, absolute paths); pass = every check true and no ask/ files. Tools: Read/Write/Edit/Glob/Grep/Bash, web disabled. Single run, no retries. 1-min load average at scoring 0.12 (8 cores). Claude Code's own reported cost for claude-haiku-5.5: $0.004012. Score: 6/6. Cost is an ESTIMATE: measured tokens x pricing.json list price (Claude Pro subscription, nothing billed); input_tokens include cache reads and writes. Single run.

Estimated cost List-price estimate; not actually billed.

Metrics

Estimated cost
$0.0040
Wall time
13s
Human step-ins
0
Turns
4
Model usage
ModelInput tokOutput tokCost
AClaude Haiku 5.5anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on86,0162,269$0.0040

Reproduce this run

  1. Use the use case prompt on the use case page.
  2. Same setup: Claude Haiku 5.5 (anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5, effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) via Claude Code 2.1.299 (headless -p), cloud.
  3. It counts as a success only if it meets every success criterion: billable_weights dimensional_weight_applied prices oversize_fees carrier_choice total
  4. Log model, tokens, wall time, human step-ins and the evidence log, then submit it as a reproduction. A different model? Submit a head-to-head rerun.

How runs are scored: Methodology.

Was this useful?

⇄ Rerun on another model

Automated checks

Trust 80% comes from these checks (how Trust % works).

Evidence log
[
 {
  "duration_api_ms": 12214,
  "stop_reason": "end_turn",
  "session_id": "[REDACTED]",
  "total_cost_usd": 0.00401166,
  "usage": {
   "input_tokens": 8,
   "cache_creation_input_tokens": 10612,
   "cache_read_input_tokens": 75396,
   "output_tokens": 2269,
   "output_tokens_details": {
    "thinking_tokens": 523
   },
   "server_tool_use": {
    "web_search_requests": 0,
    "web_fetch_requests": 0
   },
   "service_tier": "standard",
   "cache_creation": {
    "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 10612,
    "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0
   },
   "inference_geo": "global",
   "iterations": [
    {
     "input_tokens": 2,
     "output_tokens": 596,
     "cache_read_input_tokens": 22742,
     "cache_creation_input_tokens": 409,
     "cache_creation": {
      "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0,
      "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 409
     },
     "type": "message"
    }
   ],
   "speed": "standard",
   "fallback_credit": null
  },
  "modelUsage": {
   "claude-haiku-5-5": {
    "inputTokens": 8,
    "outputTokens": 2269,
    "cacheReadInputTokens": 75396,
    "cacheCreationInputTokens": 10612,
    "webSearchRequests": 0,
    "costUSD": 0.00401166,
    "contextWindow": 1000000,
    "maxOutputTokens": 128000,
    "thinkingTokens": 523,
    "canonicalModel": "claude-haiku-5-5",
    "provider": "firstParty",
    "costBasis": "list"
   }
  },
  "permission_denials": [],
  "terminal_reason": "completed",
  "fast_mode_state": "off",
  "fast_mode_disabled_reason": "sdk_opt_in_required",
  "subagent_stats": {
   "spawned": 0,
   "requested": {
    "background": 0,
    "foreground": 0,
    "unset": 0
   },
   "started_in_background": 0,
   "max_depth": 0,
   "spawned_by_subagents": 0,
   "completed": 0,
   "failed": 0,
   "killed": {
    "parent": 0,
    "user": 0,
    "system": 0
   },
   "refused": {
    "depth_limit": 0,
    "concurrency_limit": 0,
    "budget": 0
   },
   "by_type": {}
  },
  "safety_stops": 0,
  "is_error": false,
  "num_turns": 4,
  "subtype": "success",
  "api_error_status": null,
  "result": "I wrote `out/shipping.json` with all 10 parcels. The total for the chosen carriers is **$614.92**.\n\n| Parcel | Parcelia | Swiftbox | Choice |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| P01 | $30.25 | $29.16 | Swiftbox |\n| P02 | $82.78 | $57.40 | Swiftbox |\n| P03 | $47.26 | $46.29 | Swiftbox |\n| P04 | $134.40 | $122.79 | Swiftbox |\n| P05 | $39.55 | $44.08 | Parcelia |\n| P06 | $89.59 | $86.47 | Swiftbox |\n| P07 | $36.56 | $42.55 | Parcelia |\n| P08 | $42.94 | $42.25 | Swiftbox |\n| P09 | $77.40 | $91.85 | Parcelia |\n| P10 | $94.86 | $77.05 | Swiftbox |\n\nMethod:\n- Dimensional weight is computed with integer arithmetic and rounded up, so no float error can push a value across a whole pound.\n- Actual weight is rounded up to a whole pound.\n- Prices are computed with decimals and rounded to cents. Oversize fees apply only when the longest side is strictly greater than the carrier's limit. That fires for Parcelia on P02, P04 and P10, and never for Swiftbox on these parcels.\n- Ties go to Parcelia, since it is listed first in `rates.json`. No parcel actually tied.\n\nI ran the calculation in a one-off script and did not save it. I spot-checked P02 at Parcelia by hand: 7497 / 139 rounds up to 54 lb, and 10.54 + 1.08 \u00d7 53 + 15.00 oversize = $82.78.",
  "ttft_ms": 1798,
  "type": "result",
  "duration_ms": 12672,
  "uuid": "[REDACTED]",
  "ttft_stream_ms": 1329,
  "time_to_request_ms": 320,
  "first_content_frame_ms": 1330,
  "queued_turn_count": 0,
  "result_index": 0
 }
]

Get new runs and ranking changes weekly