Skip to content

Claude Opus 5.5 (effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) on Run a quarter-end leverage covenant test from the credit agreement definitions, restated quarters and mixed cash

AClaude Opus 5.5default · thinking on · Claude Code 2.1.299 (headless -p) · cloud · 2026-10-21 · by @bobsiopener

Trust 80%Fully autonomoussuccess · first try
Estimated cost
$0.10
Wall time
17s
Human step-ins
0
Outcome
Pass

Compare with other models on this task →

Summary

Exact prompt

# Run the quarter-end leverage covenant test Inputs: `agreement.json` (the credit agreement's definitions and covenant schedule), `quarterly.csv` (quarterly results; some quarters have more than one version) and `balance_sheet.json` (debt, leases and cash at the test date). Amounts are in USD thousands. Test the leverage covenant at the test date in `agreement.json`, applying the agreement's definitions exactly. - Use the most recently filed version of each quarter's numbers; forecasts are not results. - Consolidated EBITDA is over the four quarters ending on the test date. - Leverage = net debt / Consolidated EBITDA. The covenant is breached if leverage is above the maximum that applies on the test date. - EBITDA headroom = how far Consolidated EBITDA could fall before the covenant is breached, as % of Consolidated EBITDA: (EBITDA - net debt / maximum) / EBITDA x 100. Write `out/covenant.json`: `{"consolidated_ebitda": <2 decimals>, "net_debt": <2 decimals>, "leverage": <2 decimals>, "max_leverage": <x>, "breached": <true|false>, "ebitda_headroom_pct": <2 decimals>}`. Round half-up to 2 decimals for reporting only; decide the breach on unrounded figures. ## 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.

Compute Consolidated EBITDA, net debt, leverage, breach and headroom exactly as a credit agreement defines them. Two of the four quarters were restated, a forecast quarter sits in the data, one-off add-backs are capped, leases count as debt, escrowed cash cannot be netted and cash netting is capped, and the maximum steps down mid-year. Odd seeds pass the covenant and even seeds breach, always at least 0.05x from the limit. 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). Folder-restore note: this run's output files under work/out/ were lost in a 1:22 AM ET restore on Oct 21, 2026. The trace, step-in exchanges and output-hash list were checked against the recorded SHA-256 values and match; the hashes of the individual output files inside that list can no longer be recomputed. Measured data unchanged.

Success criteria: ebitda net_debt leverage_and_limit breach headroom

Setup notes: Batch 19 case u07-leverage-covenant-test (offline, synthetic inputs, seed 2422226208). 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 0.09 (8 cores). Time-zone results depend on the system time-zone database: tzdata 2026c-0+deb13u1 (Python zoneinfo). Claude Code's own reported cost for claude-opus-5.5: $0.101855. Score: 5/5. 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
$0.10
Wall time
17s
Human step-ins
0
Turns
3
Model usage
ModelInput tokOutput tokCost
AClaude Opus 5.5anthropic/claude-opus-5.5effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on57,3501,450$0.10

Reproduce this run

  1. Use the use case prompt on the use case page.
  2. Same setup: Claude Opus 5.5 (anthropic/claude-opus-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: ebitda net_debt leverage_and_limit breach headroom
  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": 16127,
  "stop_reason": "end_turn",
  "session_id": "[REDACTED]",
  "total_cost_usd": 0.1018554,
  "usage": {
   "input_tokens": 6,
   "cache_creation_input_tokens": 7867,
   "cache_read_input_tokens": 49477,
   "output_tokens": 1450,
   "output_tokens_details": {
    "thinking_tokens": 289
   },
   "server_tool_use": {
    "web_search_requests": 0,
    "web_fetch_requests": 0
   },
   "service_tier": "standard",
   "cache_creation": {
    "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 7867,
    "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0
   },
   "inference_geo": "global",
   "iterations": [
    {
     "input_tokens": 2,
     "output_tokens": 747,
     "cache_read_input_tokens": 19284,
     "cache_creation_input_tokens": 729,
     "cache_creation": {
      "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0,
      "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 729
     },
     "type": "message"
    }
   ],
   "speed": "standard",
   "fallback_credit": null
  },
  "modelUsage": {
   "claude-opus-5-5": {
    "inputTokens": 6,
    "outputTokens": 1450,
    "cacheReadInputTokens": 49477,
    "cacheCreationInputTokens": 7867,
    "webSearchRequests": 0,
    "costUSD": 0.1018554,
    "contextWindow": 1000000,
    "maxOutputTokens": 128000,
    "thinkingTokens": 289,
    "canonicalModel": "claude-opus-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": 3,
  "subtype": "success",
  "api_error_status": null,
  "result": "The covenant is **breached**: leverage is 3.50x against a maximum of 3.00x at the 2026-09-30 test date. I wrote the result to `out/covenant.json`:\n\n```json\n{\"consolidated_ebitda\": 44002.2, \"net_debt\": 153973.0, \"leverage\": 3.5, \"max_leverage\": 3.0, \"breached\": true, \"ebitda_headroom_pct\": -16.64}\n```\n\n**Consolidated EBITDA (44,002.20)**\n- **Quarters used:** 2025Q4 through 2026Q3. For 2026Q1 and 2026Q2 I used the restated versions filed in October 2026, which replace the originals. I left out the 2026Q4 forecast.\n- **Reported EBITDA:** 12,356 + 8,590 + 8,612 + 10,444 = 40,002.\n- **One-off add-backs:** these total 5,839. The agreement caps them at 10% of reported EBITDA, so only 4,000.20 counts.\n\n**Net debt (153,973.00)**\n- **Total debt (163,973):** both drawn facilities (73,707 + 72,681) plus both leases (14,862 + 2,723). The agreement counts all leases, not just finance leases.\n- **Cash deducted (10,000):** unrestricted cash is 17,088, but the agreement caps the cash you can net at 10,000. The 8,229 escrow account is excluded because escrowed cash isn't unrestricted.\n\n**Covenant test**\n- **Maximum:** 3.00x, because the test date falls after 2026-06-30.\n- **Leverage:** 3.4992x before rounding, which is above 3.00, so the covenant is breached. It reports as 3.50 after rounding.\n- **Headroom (\u221216.64%):** EBITDA would have to be about 16.6% higher for the covenant to pass.\n\nThe unrounded leverage of 3.4992x would have passed the earlier 3.50x limit, so the outcome depends on applying the 3.00x step-down that took effect after 2026-06-30.",
  "ttft_ms": 2909,
  "type": "result",
  "duration_ms": 16635,
  "uuid": "[REDACTED]",
  "ttft_stream_ms": 1877,
  "time_to_request_ms": 389,
  "first_content_frame_ms": 1877,
  "queued_turn_count": 0,
  "result_index": 0
 }
]

Get new runs and ranking changes weekly