Claude Opus 5.5 (effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) on Triage free-text incident reports by inferred impact rather than the reporter's label

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

Trust 80%Fully autonomoussuccess · first tryCompare

Estimated cost: $0.15
Wall time: 24s
Human step-ins: 0
Outcome: Pass

Compare with other models on this task →

Exact prompt

# Triage the overnight incident reports Input: `reports.json`, 30-45 free-text incident reports. Each has a reporter-chosen priority label, which is often wrong. Judge severity from what the text says actually happened. Severity rules: - SEV1: any exposure of one customer's data to another party, or data loss, affecting external customers; or at least 20% of external users blocked with no workaround. - SEV2: at least 5% of external users blocked (with or without a workaround), unless it is SEV1; or data loss affecting internal users only. - SEV3: any other impact on external users (for example slowness, or a cosmetic problem). - SEV4: everything else (internal users only, no data loss). - "Blocked" means users cannot complete the task at all. A workaround counts only if users can apply it themselves. - Shares may be given as a percentage, as "N of M", or as "1 in N". Write `out/triage.json`: `{"severity": {"<report_id>": "SEV1" | "SEV2" | "SEV3" | "SEV4", ...}, "page_now": [<SEV1 report ids, sorted>], "top5": [<5 report ids>]}`. top5 = the five most urgent reports: by severity, then by larger share of users affected, then by report id. ## 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.

Assign severities to 30-45 free-text incident reports from what each report says happened: who is affected (customers or staff), what share (as a percentage, 'N of M' or '1 in N'), whether users are fully blocked, whether a self-service workaround exists, and any data exposure or loss. Reporter labels and alarmed or casual tone are deliberately unreliable. Scoring checks the paging list, every severity and the top-5 order. 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: page_now all_severities workaround_judged internal_vs_external labels_overridden top5

Setup notes: Batch 18 case t02-incident-severity-triage (offline, synthetic inputs, seed 1040322052). 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 0.39 (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: $0.146099. 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: $0.15
Wall time: 24s
Human step-ins: 0
Turns: 3

Model usage
Model	Input tok	Output tok	Cost
AClaude Opus 5.5anthropic/claude-opus-5.5effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on	62,226	2,475	$0.15

Reproduce this run

Use the use case prompt on the use case page.
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.
It counts as a success only if it meets every success criterion: page_now all_severities workaround_judged internal_vs_external labels_overridden top5
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).

Run date is not in the future : passed
Model is in the dated pricing table : passed
Cost recomputed from tokens matches : passed
Cached tokens are consistent : passed
Output throughput is plausible : passed
Autonomy matches step-ins : passed
Step-ins do not exceed turns : passed
Retries agree with first-try result : passed
Evidence log SHA-256 matches : passed
Evidence log is substantial : passed

Evidence log

[
 {
  "duration_api_ms": 22852,
  "stop_reason": "end_turn",
  "session_id": "[REDACTED]",
  "total_cost_usd": 0.1460988,
  "usage": {
   "input_tokens": 6,
   "cache_creation_input_tokens": 10786,
   "cache_read_input_tokens": 51434,
   "output_tokens": 2475,
   "output_tokens_details": {
    "thinking_tokens": 899
   },
   "server_tool_use": {
    "web_search_requests": 0,
    "web_fetch_requests": 0
   },
   "service_tier": "standard",
   "cache_creation": {
    "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 10786,
    "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0
   },
   "inference_geo": "global",
   "iterations": [
    {
     "input_tokens": 2,
     "output_tokens": 802,
     "cache_read_input_tokens": 21279,
     "cache_creation_input_tokens": 1653,
     "cache_creation": {
      "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0,
      "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 1653
     },
     "type": "message"
    }
   ],
   "speed": "standard",
   "fallback_credit": null
  },
  "modelUsage": {
   "claude-opus-5-5": {
    "inputTokens": 6,
    "outputTokens": 2475,
    "cacheReadInputTokens": 51434,
    "cacheCreationInputTokens": 10786,
    "webSearchRequests": 0,
    "costUSD": 0.1460988,
    "contextWindow": 1000000,
    "maxOutputTokens": 128000,
    "thinkingTokens": 899,
    "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": "I triaged all 36 reports and wrote the result to `out/triage.json`. I judged each one from what the text says happened and ignored the reporter's priority label.\n\n**Page now (9 SEV1 reports):**\n\n| Report | Reason |\n|---|---|\n| INC-4018 | Another customer's shipping address seen on the page |\n| INC-4080 | 25% of customers can't check out, no workaround |\n| INC-4092 | Customers saw another account's invoices |\n| INC-4122 | 50% of customers can't sync the mobile app, no workaround |\n| INC-4134 | Customers' saved drafts were wiped and can't be recovered |\n| INC-4159 | 25% of customers blocked with no workaround, plus another customer's shipping address shown |\n| INC-4182 | 45% of customers stuck on report builder, no workaround |\n| INC-4207 | Customers' saved drafts were wiped and can't be recovered |\n| INC-4238 | Customers saw another account's invoices |\n\nINC-4134, INC-4092 and INC-4238 affect only a small share of users (4%, 2% and 5%), but data loss or exposure makes them SEV1 regardless of share.\n\n**Top 5:** INC-4122 (50%), INC-4182 (45%), INC-4080 (25%), INC-4159 (25%), INC-4018 (12.5%).\n\n**SEV2 (4):** INC-4039, INC-4046, INC-4073 and INC-4236. They block between 12% and 25% of customers. INC-4046 and INC-4236 stay below SEV1 because customers can get through on their own (the desktop site or a private browser window).\n\n**Judgement calls:**\n- **INC-4023 (SEV4):** support agents saw another account's invoices. I read the rules as counting exposure only when it affects external customers. Because the people affected here are internal staff, I rated it SEV4. If exposure of customer data to internal staff should count, this one becomes SEV1.\n- **Shares near a boundary:** \"1 in 25\" is 4%, so it's below the 5% cutoff and INC-4059 is SEV3. INC-4236 is exactly 20% blocked, but customers can retry in a private browser window themselves, so it's SEV2.\n- **Internal-only reports (SEV4):** INC-4116 has half of support agents blocked. That and the other staff-only reports are SEV4 because none of them involve data loss.",
  "ttft_ms": 2365,
  "type": "result",
  "duration_ms": 23340,
  "uuid": "[REDACTED]",
  "ttft_stream_ms": 1239,
  "time_to_request_ms": 374,
  "first_content_frame_ms": 1240,
  "queued_turn_count": 0,
  "result_index": 0
 }
]