Claude Opus 5.5 on Test AI browser agents on real workday tasks
AClaude Opus 5.5 · Claude Code 2.1.299 (headless -p) · cloud · 2026-10-14 · by @bobsiopener
- Estimated cost
- $0.10
- Wall time
- 15s
- Human step-ins
- 0
- Outcome
- Pass
Compare with other models on this task →
Summary
Exact prompt
You are a workday assistant on a mock calendar (no real accounts). Complete requests.md by editing calendar.json.
Task prompt given to the agent (headless, offline, synthetic fixture inputs): You are a workday assistant on a mock calendar (no real accounts). Complete requests.md by editing calendar.json. Inspired by https://agentusecases.ai (listing: 'Test AI browser agents on real workday tasks', natesnewsletter.substack.com) (unverified; not checked with the author). This is an independent re-run on a reproducible synthetic task; it does not report or reproduce the original post's numbers. Cost shown is a list-price API-equivalent estimate (run on a Claude Pro subscription, not billed).
Success criteria: All automated rubric checks pass: Q4 planning 2026-10-21 12:00-13:00; 1:1 2026-10-21 14:00-14:30; exactly 2 events; busy lists updated; SUMMARY.md written.
Setup notes: Cost is an ESTIMATE: Claude Code's list-price API-equivalent figure. The run used a Claude Pro subscription, so nothing was billed. input_tokens = all input incl. cache-creation and cache-read tokens; cached_tokens = cache reads (subset of input). Claude Code's cost bills cache writes at the 1h cache-write premium, so it can differ from a flat input-price recompute. Web disabled; tools Read/Write/Edit/Glob/Grep/Bash; single run; scored automatically (5/5 checks).
Estimated cost List-price estimate; not actually billed.
Metrics
- Estimated cost
- $0.10
- Wall time
- 15s
- Human step-ins
- 0
- Turns
- 3
| Model | Input tok | Output tok | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| AClaude Opus 5.5anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 | 55,286 | 1,452 | $0.10 |
Reproduce this run
- Use the use case prompt on the use case page.
- Same setup: Claude Opus 5.5 (anthropic/claude-opus-5.5) via
Claude Code 2.1.299 (headless -p), cloud. - It counts as a success only if it meets every success criterion: All automated rubric checks pass: Q4 planning 2026-10-21 12:00-13:00; 1:1 2026-10-21 14:00-14:30; exactly 2 events; busy lists updated; SUMMARY.md written.
- 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?
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": 13475,
"stop_reason": "end_turn",
"session_id": "[REDACTED]",
"total_cost_usd": 0.0971926,
"usage": {
"input_tokens": 6,
"cache_creation_input_tokens": 7317,
"cache_read_input_tokens": 47963,
"output_tokens": 1452,
"output_tokens_details": {
"thinking_tokens": 298
},
"server_tool_use": {
"web_search_requests": 0,
"web_fetch_requests": 0
},
"service_tier": "standard",
"cache_creation": {
"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 7317,
"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0
},
"inference_geo": "global",
"iterations": [
{
"input_tokens": 2,
"output_tokens": 380,
"cache_read_input_tokens": 18347,
"cache_creation_input_tokens": 1116,
"cache_creation": {
"ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0,
"ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 1116
},
"type": "message"
}
],
"speed": "standard",
"fallback_credit": null
},
"modelUsage": {
"claude-opus-5-5": {
"inputTokens": 6,
"outputTokens": 1452,
"cacheReadInputTokens": 47963,
"cacheCreationInputTokens": 7317,
"webSearchRequests": 0,
"costUSD": 0.0971926,
"contextWindow": 1000000,
"maxOutputTokens": 128000,
"thinkingTokens": 298,
"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 scheduled both meetings in `calendar.json` and wrote `SUMMARY.md` (times are America/New_York).\n\n- **Task A: Q4 planning** is on **2026-10-21 from 12:00 to 13:00** with bob, priya and marco. There was no 60-minute window on 2026-10-20 when all three were free: the only open slots were 11:00\u201311:30 and 12:30\u201313:00, each 30 minutes. On 10-21, 12:00 is the first time all three are free, because bob is busy until then.\n- **Task B: 1:1 bob/priya** is on **2026-10-21 from 14:00 to 14:30**. Bob is busy until 13:00 (including Q4 planning) and priya is busy from 13:00 to 14:00, so 14:00 is the earliest time they're both free.\n- **Task C:** `SUMMARY.md` lists both events with their times, attendees and why each slot was chosen.\n\nBoth events are in `events`, and their times are added to each attendee's busy list. The request only asked for that on Task A, but I also added the 1:1 to bob's and priya's busy lists so their calendars stay accurate.",
"ttft_ms": 2098,
"type": "result",
"duration_ms": 13903,
"uuid": "[REDACTED]",
"ttft_stream_ms": 908,
"time_to_request_ms": 306,
"first_content_frame_ms": 908,
"queued_turn_count": 0,
"result_index": 0
}