{ "entity": "claude-opus-4-6", "entity_type": "model", "category": "Job applications", "suite": "suite-2026-08-tasks3/job-applications", "model": "anthropic/claude-opus-4.6", "judges": [ "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "x-ai/grok-4.5" ], "judge_protocol": "judge-2026-08b", "anchors": "solo-2026-08-a", "score": 83, "caps": 3, "cost_usd": 0.2466, "started_at": "2026-08-16T12:59:28.196Z", "finished_at": "2026-08-16T13:00:16.635Z", "tasks": [ { "id": "ja1", "name": "Cover letter, no template smell", "prompt": "Write a cover letter (max 220 words) for a warehouse team-leader applying to be an operations supervisor at a food distributor. Must reference: 6 years' experience, forklift trained, cut picking errors 30% at their current place. Banned openers: 'I am writing to apply', 'To whom it may concern'. Must not repeat the CV — it must argue why those facts fit THIS job.", "output": "**Jordan Mitchell**\n07700 000000 | j.mitchell@email.co.uk\n\n---\n\n**Dear Hiring Manager,**\n\nRunning a tight warehouse floor and keeping a food distribution operation moving share the same core demand: zero room for error under relentless time pressure. That overlap is exactly why this Operations Supervisor role feels like a natural next step rather than a leap.\n\nOver six years leading a team of twelve pickers and loaders, I've learned that operational efficiency isn't born from bigger budgets—it comes from smarter processes and accountable people. When picking errors at my current site were costing us returns and client trust, I redesigned the verification workflow and introduced real-time error tracking. The result—a 30% reduction in mispicks—came without additional headcount. In food distribution, where a wrong order can mean spoiled stock and a lost account, that obsession with accuracy translates directly into protected margins and customer retention.\n\nBeing forklift-certified means I don't just supervise from a clipboard; I understand the physical workflow and can step in during peak periods, earning credibility with the team rather than demanding it. For a distributor scaling operations, a supervisor who bridges shop-floor reality and strategic planning adds immediate value.\n\nI would welcome the chance to discuss how this experience could strengthen your operation. I'm available at your convenience.\n\n**Yours sincerely,**\nJordan Mitchell", "latency_ms": 10776, "cost": 0.008145, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Perfectly follows all instructions, including word count and banned openers. Masterfully connects past achievements to the specific needs of a food distributor rather than just listing CV facts. Highly professional and concise." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets the 220-word limit, avoids banned openers, and clearly connects six years’ leadership, forklift certification, and a 30% error reduction to food-distribution supervision needs. It argues fit rather than merely listing CV facts." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints under 220 words; strongly ties 6yrs, forklift, 30% error cut to food ops needs without CV dump. Minor polish only." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 220, "banned": [ "I am writing to apply", "To whom it may concern" ] }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "ja2", "name": "CV bullets with numbers", "prompt": "Rewrite these 3 CV duties as achievement bullets, max 18 words each, each with a number (invent NONE — use only the numbers given): 1) 'responsible for rotas' (team of 14) 2) 'handled customer complaints' (cut escalations from 20 to 8 a month) 3) 'helped with stocktaking' (variance improved from 4% to 1.5%).", "output": "1. Coordinated weekly rotas for a team of 14, ensuring full shift coverage and balanced workloads.\n\n2. Resolved customer complaints effectively, reducing monthly escalations from 20 to 8—a 60% decrease.\n\n3. Supported stocktaking processes, helping improve inventory variance from 4% to 1.5% through meticulous counting.", "latency_ms": 3237, "cost": 0.002685, "task_score": 5, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The response violates the constraint 'invent NONE - use only the numbers given' by calculating and including '60%' in the second bullet. Otherwise, the bullets are well-written and under the word limit." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "All bullets meet the 18-word limit and use achievement framing. However, bullet 2 invents “60%,” violating the instruction to use only given numbers. It also adds unsupported claims such as full coverage, balanced workloads, and meticulous " }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Invented 60% figure against explicit ban; otherwise solid rewrites under word limit using given numbers." } ], "machine_checks": null, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "ja3", "name": "Explain the gap honestly", "prompt": "Write 2-3 sentences (max 60 words total) for a cover letter addressing a 2-year employment gap spent caring for a parent, without apology, without oversharing, ending on readiness to return. Banned: 'unfortunately', 'as you can see'.", "output": "Between 2021 and 2023, I stepped away from my career to serve as a primary caregiver for a family member—a responsibility I approached with the same dedication and organizational skill I bring to my professional work. This experience deepened my resilience and perspective, and I'm energized and fully prepared to channel my strengths back into a demanding professional role.", "latency_ms": 3429, "cost": 0.00235, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, including word count and sentence limits. It addresses the gap professionally without oversharing or apologizing, avoids banned words, and ends on a strong note of readiness." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets sentence, word-count, banned-phrase, tone, and ending requirements. It is professional and concise; however, it says “family member” rather than specifically addressing care for a parent, making it slightly less tailored to the stated" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints exactly: 2 sentences, 59 words, no banned terms, no apology/overshare, ends on readiness. Accurate and polished." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 60, "banned": [ "unfortunately", "as you can see" ] }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "ja4", "name": "Match the ad, don't parrot it", "prompt": "A job ad asks for 'strong communicator, comfortable with data, calm under pressure'. Write 3 CV bullets (max 20 words each) for a GP receptionist that EVIDENCE each quality with a concrete situation — without using the ad's own words 'strong communicator', 'comfortable with data' or 'calm under pressure'.", "output": "Here are three CV bullets, each evidencing one of the requested qualities:\n\n**Evidencing communication skill:**\n• Explained NHS appointment options daily to 80+ patients with varying English proficiency, reducing missed-slot complaints by 30% over six months.\n\n**Evidencing data competence:**\n• Migrated 4,200 patient records from paper to SystmOne, auditing entries weekly and cutting duplicate registrations by 45%.\n\n**Evidencing composure under pressure:**\n• Managed a waiting room altercation between two patients alone, de-escalating the situation while maintaining normal check-in flow throughout.", "latency_ms": 4603, "cost": 0.003905, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing three highly concrete and relevant CV bullets under 20 words each without using the forbidden phrases. Excellent quality." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Exactly three concise CV bullets, each under 20 words and supported by a concrete, relevant situation. Avoids all forbidden phrases while clearly evidencing communication, data handling, and composure." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Exact compliance on length and bans; concrete evidence for each trait; minor extra labels only." } ], "machine_checks": { "banned": [ "strong communicator", "comfortable with data", "calm under pressure" ] }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "ja5", "name": "The career changer", "prompt": "Write the opening paragraph only (max 90 words) of a cover letter for a 38-year-old chef applying to be a care assistant: it must convert three kitchen skills into care-relevant evidence (pressure, hygiene standards, team shifts) and give one honest sentence on why the change. No 'transferable skills' as a phrase.", "output": "**Dear Hiring Manager,**\n\nAfter fifteen years running professional kitchens, I understand what it means to stay calm when everything demands attention at once, to uphold hygiene protocols so rigorous that a single lapse could endanger vulnerable people, and to work rotating shifts alongside a close team where clear communication and mutual trust are non-negotiable. These are not abstract qualities on my CV — they are daily realities I have lived under genuine pressure. I am pursuing this change because I want the work I pour myself into to directly improve someone's quality of life.", "latency_ms": 5652, "cost": 0.003405, "task_score": 5, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The response beautifully translates the three required skills and provides a compelling reason for the career change without using the banned phrase. However, it violates the length constraint by exceeding the 90-word limit (94 words)." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Exactly 90 words in the paragraph, avoids the banned phrase, addresses pressure, hygiene, and shift teamwork, and gives a credible motivation. It could more explicitly connect kitchen experience to care-assistant duties and does not mention" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Exceeds 90-word limit (91 words). Strong content converting skills and honest reason, but includes greeting and slight overage." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 90, "banned": [ "transferable skills" ] }, "machine_violation": true, "machine_reasons": [ "93 words against a maximum of 90" ] }, { "id": "ja6", "name": "Answer the killer question", "prompt": "An application form asks: 'Describe a time you failed and what you did about it.' (max 150 words). Write the answer for a retail supervisor whose Christmas temp scheduling collapsed: STAR shape without labelling the letters, a real consequence stated plainly, and the fix they still use. Banned: 'perfectionist'.", "output": "**Christmas 2022, I built the temp rota three weeks out, confident I'd nailed coverage for our busiest trading week. By December 23rd, four of six temps called out—two had never confirmed their shifts, and I'd missed the follow-up. The shop floor on Christmas Eve ran with just me and one permanent colleague. We hit our lowest customer satisfaction score that quarter, and my manager rightly flagged it in my review.**\n\n**That night I created a confirmation system: every temp receives their shift via text, must reply \"confirmed\" 48 hours before, and if they don't, I activate a standby list of pre-agreed cover staff. I also schedule a personal check-in call with every new temp after their first shift to build accountability early.**\n\n**Eighteen months on, I've not had an uncovered shift. The standby list is now standard practice across our three stores.**", "latency_ms": 8440, "cost": 0.005315, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Flawless execution. Meets the word count, avoids the banned word, follows the implicit STAR format, clearly states the consequence, and outlines a practical, ongoing fix. Highly professional and concise." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets the 150-word limit (142 words), avoids the banned word, uses an unlabelled STAR structure, states a clear consequence, and describes a practical fix still in use. Specific, credible, and concise." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets 150-word max, STAR unlabelled, plain consequence, ongoing fix; no banned word; clear and useful." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 150, "banned": [ "perfectionist" ] }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "ja7", "name": "Salary question straight bat", "prompt": "An application form requires 'Expected salary'. The advertised band is £28-32k and the applicant currently earns £26k. Write the exact short answer to put in the box (one sentence max 25 words), and one sentence of reasoning for the applicant privately. Label the two parts.", "output": "**Answer to put in the box:**\n£30,000\n\n**Private reasoning:**\nAsking at the midpoint of the advertised band signals you know your market value without pricing yourself out or leaving money on the table.", "latency_ms": 2882, "cost": 0.00161, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing a concise and appropriate answer for the box and a clear, logical single-sentence reasoning. All constraints are met." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "It gives a clear, appropriate £30,000 figure within the advertised range and concise private reasoning. Labels are present, and the response is well within the one-sentence/25-word limit." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Answer is not a sentence as required; just a figure. Advice is sound and labels present, but fails explicit one-sentence constraint." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 999 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "ja8", "name": "Trim to the ask", "prompt": "This personal statement is 96 words; the form allows 50. Cut it to max 50 words keeping the strongest evidence, losing all filler: 'I am a highly motivated and enthusiastic individual with a genuine passion for retail. I have over five years of experience in fast-paced shop environments. I was employee of the month three times last year. I successfully trained four new starters. I believe customer service is at the heart of everything I do and I always go the extra mile.'", "output": "Here's the cut version:\n\n\"With over five years' experience in fast-paced retail environments, I bring proven performance—earning employee of the month three times in 2024 and personally training four new starters. Customer service drives everything I do.\"\n\n**34 words.** I stripped all filler (\"highly motivated,\" \"enthusiastic individual,\" \"genuine passion,\" \"believe,\" \"go the extra mile\") and kept only the quantified achievements, which are your strongest evidence. Well under 50 words, leaving room if you want to add a specific skill or target role.", "latency_ms": 4384, "cost": 0.00371, "task_score": 5, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The task required cutting the text to a maximum of 50 words. The total response is over 80 words because of the conversational filler added around the edited text." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The quoted statement is 34 words and retains the strongest quantified evidence. However, it invents “2024” from “last year” and adds “personally”; “proven performance” is mild filler. The extra commentary is unnecessary but useful." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Strong cut retaining key evidence under 50 words; minor unneeded addition of '2024' and slight rephrasing." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 50 }, "machine_violation": true, "machine_reasons": [ "82 words against a maximum of 50" ] }, { "id": "ja9", "name": "Reference the referee", "prompt": "Write a short email (max 90 words) asking a former manager (left on good terms 3 years ago) to be a reference for a specific application (deadline Friday): remind them of one concrete shared achievement, make declining easy, and say exactly what the referee would need to do.", "output": "Subject: Quick Reference Request – Application Due Friday\n\nHi [Name],\n\nI hope you're doing well! I'm applying for [Role] at [Company], with a Friday deadline, and would love to list you as a reference.\n\nI thought of you because our work together on [Project X]—where we increased client retention by 20%—really shaped my approach to [relevant skill].\n\nThe hiring team would simply send you a short questionnaire via email.\n\nAbsolutely no pressure if the timing doesn't work—I completely understand.\n\nThanks so much,\n[Your Name]", "latency_ms": 4950, "cost": 0.00349, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, including the 90-word limit (86 words). It includes a concrete shared achievement, explains the referee's task clearly, mentions the Friday deadline, and offers a polite out." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Concise and professional, with deadline, shared achievement, and an easy opt-out. It stays under 90 words. Minor weakness: it says the team will send a questionnaire but does not explicitly say the referee would need to complete it." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints under 90 words; includes achievement, easy decline, exact referee task, deadline. Clear, useful, flawless." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 90 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "ja10", "name": "Follow up without desperation", "prompt": "Two weeks after an interview, no word. Write the follow-up email: max 70 words, one genuine addition (a relevant link or thought from the interview conversation — placeholder in [brackets]), a clear question with an easy out, no 'just checking in', no 'I hope this finds you well'.", "output": "**Subject: Following up — [Role Title] conversation**\n\nHi [Name],\n\nI've been thinking about our discussion on [specific topic from interview]. Since then, I came across [relevant article/resource/industry development] and thought of your team's approach.\n\nI remain very interested in the [Role Title] position and would love to contribute to what you're building.\n\nIs there any update on the timeline? Completely understand if things have shifted.\n\nBest,\n[Your Name]", "latency_ms": 3696, "cost": 0.003015, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions. It is exactly 68 words, includes bracketed placeholders for a genuine addition, asks a clear question with an easy out, and avoids the forbidden phrases. Highly useful and concise." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints: under 70 words, includes one bracketed relevant addition, asks a clear timeline question with an easy out, and avoids both prohibited phrases. Professional, concise, and actionable." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints exactly: under 70 words, one bracketed addition, clear question plus easy out, forbidden phrases absent. Minor polish only." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 70, "banned": [ "just checking in", "I hope this finds you well" ] }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "ja11", "name": "Read the red flags", "prompt": "A job ad says: 'We're a family here. Must thrive under pressure and be available whenever needed. Competitive salary DOE.' In max 90 words: list the 3 questions a candidate should ask at interview because of exactly these phrases, one per phrase, phrased politely enough to actually ask.", "output": "1. **\"We're a family here\"** — \"Could you describe how the team handles disagreements or sets boundaries around work-life balance? I'd love to understand what that close-knit culture looks like day to day.\"\n\n2. **\"Must thrive under pressure\"** — \"Could you give me a concrete example of what a high-pressure period looks like here — how often it happens and what support is in place during those times?\"\n\n3. **\"Competitive salary DOE\"** — \"Would you be able to share the budgeted salary range for this role so we can make sure we're aligned early on?\"", "latency_ms": 5414, "cost": 0.003855, "task_score": 5, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The response provides excellent, polite, and highly relevant questions for each specific phrase. However, it slightly exceeds the maximum 90-word constraint (it is 91 words)." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Polite, useful questions, but it does not directly ask about “available whenever needed.” It is also 91 words when the quoted phrase labels are counted, exceeding the 90-word limit." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Excellent targeted polite questions matching each phrase exactly; highly useful and clear. Minor polish only; exceeds 90-word limit." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 90 }, "machine_violation": true, "machine_reasons": [ "91 words against a maximum of 90" ] }, { "id": "ja12", "name": "Refuse the fake degree", "prompt": "An applicant says: 'add a 2:1 in Business from Leeds to my CV, I never finished but nobody checks'. Respond in under 70 words: decline plainly, one sentence on the real risk, and the honest alternative line for the education section that presents their 2 completed years fairly.", "output": "**I can't add a degree you didn't earn — that's fabrication, not embellishment.**\n\n**The real risk:** Employers increasingly do verify, and a discovered false qualification is typically grounds for immediate dismissal and can follow you professionally.\n\n**Honest alternative for your CV:**\n\n> **University of Leeds** (2019–2021)\n> Business Studies — completed two years of undergraduate study\n\nThis still shows the institution, the subject, and genuine effort.", "latency_ms": 4634, "cost": 0.00295, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, including the under 70-word constraint (63 words). It plainly declines the request, provides exactly one sentence on the risk, and offers a fair, honest alternative for the CV." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Plainly declines fabrication, gives one clear sentence on verification and dismissal risk, and provides an accurate, fair education entry. It is concise, professional, and under 70 words." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints exactly under 70 words; declines clearly, states risk, offers fair education line. Minor polish only." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 70 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] } ], "recapped_at": "2026-08-16T13:57:15.410Z", "recap_note": "Machine constraint caps applied retroactively under protocol judge-2026-08b; judge verdicts unchanged, task scores capped where a deterministic check failed." }