Find support tickets that breached SLA, measured in business hours across time zones, holidays and customer-wait pauses
Exact prompt
# Which support tickets breached their SLA last month? Inputs: `tickets.csv` (ticket, customer, priority), `customers.csv` (plan), `events.csv` (every status change of every ticket, timestamps with their own UTC offsets) and `sla.json` (targets, support hours, holidays). For each ticket, measure time to resolution in business hours and compare it with its target. - The clock runs only during support hours on working days, in the support team's time zone given in `sla.json`. Holidays are not working days. - The clock is paused while a ticket is waiting on the customer. - The target depends on priority and on the customer's plan as `sla.json` sets out. - A ticket breaches if its business time is strictly greater than its target. Write `out/sla.json`: `{"breached": [<ticket ids, sorted>], "breach_count": <n>, "median_hours_by_priority": {"P1": <h>, "P2": <h>, "P3": <h>}, "worst_overrun": "<ticket id>"}`. Hours are business hours rounded to 2 decimals, half-up. `worst_overrun` is the ticket with the largest business time minus target. ## 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.
Measure 36-48 tickets against priority- and plan-based targets in business hours. Status events arrive shuffled with mixed UTC offsets, the clock pauses while waiting on the customer, two holidays fall in the month, and premium customers get half the target. Wall-clock, holiday-blind and pause-blind readings all give a different breach list. 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: breached_set breach_count medians worst_overrun
Best model for this task so far: Claude Haiku 5.5 (effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) (success, $0.0092, 32s).
All runs (3)
100% pass rate across 3 eligible runs: 3 pass, 0 partial, 0 fail. Partial and failed runs are listed below with everything else.ⓘ
| Model | Cost | Time | Step-insⓘ | Autonomy | Outcome | Trustⓘ | Date | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AClaude Opus 5.5default · thinking on | $0.22 | 31m | 0 | Fully autonomous | pass | Trust 80% | 2026-10-21 | |
| AClaude Haiku 5.5default · thinking on | $0.0092 | 32s | 0 | Fully autonomous | pass | Trust 80% | 2026-10-21 | |
| AClaude Sonnet 5.5default · thinking on | $0.08 | 19s | 0 | Fully autonomous | pass | Trust 80% | 2026-10-21 |
Embed this result
A live badge for this use case. It links back here and updates as new runs are published.
Get new runs and ranking changes weekly
Which models got better or cheaper on real tasks like this one.