Skip to content

Claude Sonnet 5.5 (effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) on Answer 6 multi-hop questions from ~150KB of meeting notes with corrections and decoys

AClaude Sonnet 5.5default · thinking on · Claude Code 2.1.299 (headless -p) · cloud · 2026-10-16 · by @bobsiopener

Trust 80%Fully autonomoussuccess · first try
Estimated cost
$0.08
Wall time
22s
Human step-ins
0
Outcome
Pass

Compare with other models on this task →

Summary

Exact prompt (this run)

# Task: answer questions from a year of meeting notes `meeting_notes.txt` holds ~400 meeting entries (≈220 KB). Facts are spread across meetings and some are later corrected, drafted, or rejected. Answer from the notes only. Write `answers.json`: {"q1": {"answer": "...", "meeting": <meeting number that is the authoritative source>}, ...} - q1: What capex was approved for the warehouse-robotics initiative? - q2: Who approved it? - q3: Who currently owns the contract with the lidar vendor for that initiative? - q4: Who chairs the security standup now? - q5: Which firmware version fixed the root cause of the lidar incident? - q6: When and where is the robotics lab moving (month and building)? No network.

Codename indirection, superseded/void figures, ownership hand-offs and postponed dates; must cite the authoritative meeting number. 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: 1. All 6 answers must contain the required token(s) for the authoritative (latest/approved) fact, case-insensitive. 2. Answers must not contain the superseded/void/decoy values for that question (any decoy present = wrong). 3. At least 5 of 6 cited meeting numbers must be the exact authoritative meeting.

Setup notes: Use Case Scout batch 4 case d10-long-context-needles (offline fixture). Prepared with batch4/prepare.sh; hidden key/tests kept outside the agent's work dir. Prompt = TASK.md verbatim. Scored with the scout's scorer: `python score.py WORKDIR KEYDIR/key.json`. Tools: Read/Write/Edit/Glob/Grep/Bash, web disabled. Single run, no retries. Rescored 2026-10-16 with Scout's fixed scorer (see batch4/CHANGES-2026-10-16.md). The original score was fail, and the model's output is unchanged. Claude Code's own reported cost for claude-sonnet-5.5: $0.07747. Score: pass. 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
$0.08
Wall time
22s
Human step-ins
0
Turns
6
Model usage
ModelInput tokOutput tokCost
AClaude Sonnet 5.5anthropic/claude-sonnet-5.5effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on132,0061,839$0.08

Reproduce this run

  1. Use the exact prompt shown above for this run (the use case page has the shared prompt).
  2. Same setup: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (anthropic/claude-sonnet-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: 1. All 6 answers must contain the required token(s) for the authoritative (latest/approved) fact, case-insensitive. 2. Answers must not contain the superseded/void/decoy values for that question (any decoy present = wrong). 3. At least 5 of 6 cited meeting numbers must be the exact authoritative meeting.
  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": 20764,
  "stop_reason": "end_turn",
  "session_id": "[REDACTED]",
  "total_cost_usd": 0.0774696,
  "usage": {
   "input_tokens": 12,
   "cache_creation_input_tokens": 11758,
   "cache_read_input_tokens": 120236,
   "output_tokens": 1839,
   "output_tokens_details": {
    "thinking_tokens": 116
   },
   "server_tool_use": {
    "web_search_requests": 0,
    "web_fetch_requests": 0
   },
   "service_tier": "standard",
   "cache_creation": {
    "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 11758,
    "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0
   },
   "inference_geo": "global",
   "iterations": [
    {
     "input_tokens": 2,
     "output_tokens": 474,
     "cache_read_input_tokens": 23953,
     "cache_creation_input_tokens": 344,
     "cache_creation": {
      "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0,
      "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 344
     },
     "type": "message"
    }
   ],
   "speed": "standard",
   "fallback_credit": null
  },
  "modelUsage": {
   "claude-sonnet-5-5": {
    "inputTokens": 12,
    "outputTokens": 1839,
    "cacheReadInputTokens": 120236,
    "cacheCreationInputTokens": 11758,
    "webSearchRequests": 0,
    "costUSD": 0.0774696,
    "contextWindow": 1000000,
    "maxOutputTokens": 128000,
    "thinkingTokens": 116,
    "canonicalModel": "claude-sonnet-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": 6,
  "subtype": "success",
  "api_error_status": null,
  "result": "I wrote `answers.json` with all six answers. I read them from keyword hits and the entries around them, not by reading all ~400 meetings. A later correction that doesn't use words like \"correction\", \"draft\" or \"approved\" could have been missed.\n\n| Q | Answer | Meeting | Why this meeting |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| q1 | EUR 2.4M | 311 | It says the earlier EUR 3.1M draft figure is void. Meeting 151 only discussed 3.1M and left it unapproved. |\n| q2 | Dalia Haddad (CFO delegate) | 311 | Same entry as q1. |\n| q3 | Ines Duarte | 261 | Erik Lund held the contract from meeting 091, then handed ownership to Ines Duarte effective 2026-07-01. |\n| q4 | Hiro Sato | 201 | Chen Yu stepped down. |\n| q5 | Firmware 3.2.4 | 371 | The root cause was a certificate pinning bug in 3.2.1, fixed in 3.2.4. Meeting 366's \"network outage\" note was later disproved. |\n| q6 | November, Building F | 331 | The move was postponed from September. Meeting 121 had the original September date. |\n\n\"Project Kestrel\" is the codename for the warehouse-robotics initiative, set in meeting 038. The \"Project Osprey\" proposal in meeting 056 was rejected.",
  "ttft_ms": 4822,
  "type": "result",
  "duration_ms": 21149,
  "uuid": "[REDACTED]",
  "ttft_stream_ms": 3750,
  "time_to_request_ms": 245,
  "first_content_frame_ms": 3750,
  "queued_turn_count": 0,
  "result_index": 0
 }
]

Get new runs and ranking changes weekly