{ "entity": "claude-sonnet-5", "entity_type": "model", "category": "Presentations", "suite": "suite-2026-08-tasks4/presentations", "model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "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": 88, "caps": 1, "cost_usd": 0.2004, "started_at": "2026-08-16T14:02:41.349Z", "finished_at": "2026-08-16T14:03:22.303Z", "tasks": [ { "id": "pr1", "name": "Deck from a standing start", "prompt": "Plan a 10-minute presentation to the parish council proposing a zebra crossing outside St Mary's Primary. You have: 2 near-misses reported this term, a 140-signature petition, and an estimated £24,000 cost. Outline 8 slides — for each give a short title and the one point that slide must land. The ask (a feasibility study, not the money) must arrive by slide 3, not the end.", "output": "# 10-Minute Presentation: Zebra Crossing Outside St Mary's Primary\n\n**Slide 1 — \"A Growing Risk Outside Our School Gates\"**\nLand the point: Two near-misses this term aren't bad luck — they're a warning sign that demands action now, before there's a serious injury.\n\n**Slide 2 — \"140 Voices Agree\"**\nLand the point: This isn't one parent's concern — 140 signatures show the community already recognises this as a shared safety priority.\n\n**Slide 3 — \"Our Ask Today: A Feasibility Study\"**\nLand the point: We're not asking the council to commit £24,000 today — we're asking for approval to commission a feasibility study so the council has the data needed to make that decision properly.\n\n**Slide 4 — \"What the Near-Misses Tell Us\"**\nLand the point: Brief detail on the two incidents (time of day, location, contributing factors) to show this is a pattern tied to specific pinch-points, not a one-off.\n\n**Slide 5 — \"Why a Crossing, Why Here\"**\nLand the point: The site meets recognised criteria for a pedestrian crossing (pupil numbers, traffic volume/speed, sightlines) — a study will confirm suitability and the right type of crossing.\n\n**Slide 6 — \"The £24,000 Figure — Context, Not Commitment\"**\nLand the point: This is an early estimate from comparable schemes; the feasibility study will produce an accurate costed proposal and identify funding routes (highways budget, grants, developer contributions).\n\n**Slide 7 — \"What the Study Would Cover and Cost\"**\nLand the point: Set expectations — likely scope (traffic survey, engineering assessment, consultation) and a modest cost/timeframe for the study itself, so the council knows exactly what they're approving today.\n\n**Slide 8 — \"Next Steps and Timeline\"**\nLand the point: Confirm the concrete decision needed today (approve the feasibility study), who will own it, and when findings would return to council — leaving them with a clear, low-risk action to agree to now.", "latency_ms": 9802, "cost": 0.00714, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, including the specific constraints (8 slides, ask by slide 3, incorporating all provided data). It is clear, concise, and highly useful for a professional presentation." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clear eight-slide structure, with the feasibility-study ask correctly on slide 3 and all supplied evidence used. Minor weakness: it assumes incident details and claims the site meets crossing criteria without evidence provided; these should" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all requirements precisely: 8 slides, titles + one point each, ask by slide 3. Clear, useful, accurate structure for busy audience." } ], "machine_checks": null, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr2", "name": "Speaker notes, not an essay", "prompt": "Write the speaker notes (max 120 words) for a single slide titled 'Why we lost the Henderson account'. Facts: response times slipped from 4 hours to 2 days over six months; the client flagged it twice; a competitor promised same-day. The notes must sound like a person talking, admit the failure plainly, and set up the next slide, which is the fix. Return only the notes.", "output": "Let's just be straight about this one. Our response times crept from 4 hours to two full days over six months — that's not a small slip, that's a pattern. Henderson told us twice. Twice. And we didn't turn it around either time. Meanwhile a competitor walked in promising same-day responses, and honestly, why wouldn't the client take that offer? We gave them every reason to leave.\n\nI'm not going to dress this up — we lost them because we got slow and we didn't listen when they warned us. That's on us, not on the market or the client's expectations changing.\n\nSo next slide: what we're actually doing about it, starting now.", "latency_ms": 5651, "cost": 0.002656, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions. It includes all required facts, maintains an excellent conversational tone that plainly admits failure, sets up the next slide, and stays under the 120-word limit while returning only the not" }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Plainspoken, accurate, and clearly admits responsibility. It includes all required facts, stays well under 120 words, sounds natural when spoken, and cleanly transitions to the next slide on the fix." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all facts, tone, setup; under 120 words; only notes returned; natural speech admitting failure plainly." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 120 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr3", "name": "One slide, not a memo", "prompt": "Turn this paragraph into ONE slide: a headline of max 8 words, then max 4 bullets. Paragraph: 'Following an extensive review of our logistics operations, the board has decided to relocate the central warehouse from the Norwich site to a larger facility outside Peterborough. The move is scheduled for the first week of March and is expected to reduce average delivery times to our northern customers by around a day and a half. There will be no redundancies: all fourteen warehouse staff have been offered relocation packages or transfers to the Norwich retail branch. Customers should see no disruption, as the two sites will run in parallel for a fortnight during the changeover.'", "output": "# Warehouse Relocation: Norwich to Peterborough\n\n- Central warehouse moving to larger Peterborough facility, first week of March\n- Northern customer delivery times expected to improve by ~1.5 days\n- No redundancies: all 14 staff offered relocation or Norwich transfer\n- Zero disruption planned — sites run in parallel for two-week changeover", "latency_ms": 3641, "cost": 0.001674, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly captures the key points in a concise, slide-ready format. It strictly adheres to the constraints of a maximum 8-word headline and maximum 4 bullets. Highly useful and clear." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurately captures all key decisions, timing, customer benefit, staff impact, and continuity plan. Headline has 5 words and there are exactly 4 clear, concise bullets." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Headline 5 words, exactly 4 accurate bullets; fully captures source facts clearly and concisely for busy pros." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_bullets": 4 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr4", "name": "The first 30 seconds", "prompt": "Write the spoken opening (max 80 words) of a careers-evening talk to 40 sixth-formers about plumbing apprenticeships. It must earn attention in the first sentence with something concrete from these true facts: day-one pay £15k rising to £32k qualified; a Christmas Day callout; zero student debt. It must not begin with 'Hello' or 'Good evening' and must not introduce the speaker — banned phrase: 'my name is'.", "output": "Last Christmas Day, while you were opening presents, I was up to my elbows in someone else's burst pipe — and getting paid triple time for it.\n\nThat's the plumbing trade for you: unglamorous, occasionally soggy, and surprisingly lucrative. You start on £15k as an apprentice, qualify in a few years on £32k, and you'll never once have to fill in a student loan form.\n\nNo debt. No essays. Just a toolbox and a trade that always needs doing.", "latency_ms": 5111, "cost": 0.002326, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Flawless response. It perfectly integrates the required facts, grabs attention immediately, adheres strictly to the 80-word limit (79 words), and successfully avoids all banned greetings and introductions. Highly engaging for the target aud" }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 7, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Strong, engaging opening that meets length, opening-hook, and banned-phrase requirements. However, “triple time,” “in a few years,” and especially “No essays” are unsupported or potentially inaccurate embellishments for apprenticeships." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints exactly: 78 words, strong concrete opener from facts, pay/debt details, no banned starts or phrases." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 80, "banned": [ "my name is" ] }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr5", "name": "Slide on a diet", "prompt": "This slide is for a 5-minute update to the senior team. Cut it to the bullets that help them DECIDE something — max 4 bullets, nothing else added. Slide 'Office move update': - Project kicked off on 4 June as agreed - Weekly meetings have been held every Tuesday - The project team has worked very hard - Three sites shortlisted, all within 2 miles of the station - Broadband installation lead time is 6 weeks, which is now the critical path - We looked at many options for furniture - Costs are tracking 8% under the £90k budget - The tone of meetings has been very positive - Decision needed by 30 September or we lose the preferred site.", "output": "Here are the bullets that actually support a decision:\n\n**Office move update**\n\n- Three sites shortlisted, all within 2 miles of the station\n- Broadband installation lead time is 6 weeks, which is now the critical path\n- Costs are tracking 8% under the £90k budget\n- Decision needed by 30 September or we lose the preferred site", "latency_ms": 3126, "cost": 0.001558, "task_score": 5, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The response selected the correct 4 bullets but violated the 'nothing else added' constraint by including introductory text and a title." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The four selected bullets are decision-relevant and accurately preserve the key trade-offs, budget status, critical path, and deadline. However, it adds an introductory sentence and a title despite the instruction to provide bullets only an" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Selected the 4 decision-relevant bullets correctly and usefully. Added intro text and title, breaching 'nothing else added'." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_bullets": 4 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr6", "name": "Right chart, right headline", "prompt": "A slide must show these figures: complaints per month — Jan 42, Feb 44, Mar 41, Apr 78, May 80, Jun 83. The April jump coincided with a new phone system. Say which chart type you would use and why (one sentence), write the slide headline as a FINDING (not 'Complaints data'), and name the one annotation you would add to the chart itself.", "output": "**Chart type:** A line chart, because it best shows the trend over time and makes the sudden shift after March visually obvious.\n\n**Slide headline (finding):** \"Complaints Nearly Doubled After April's Phone System Launch\"\n\n**Annotation on the chart:** A vertical marker line (or arrow/callout) at April labeled \"New phone system introduced\" to visually tie the spike to the likely cause.", "latency_ms": 4366, "cost": 0.001592, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing a one-sentence rationale for the chart type, a clear finding-based headline, and the correct annotation. It is highly useful and concise." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Correct chart choice and a strong, numerically supported finding. However, it offers alternative annotations (“marker line” or “arrow/callout”) rather than naming exactly one, and “likely cause” overstates the stated coincidence." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Perfect chart choice, accurate finding headline, and ideal annotation; fully meets all task needs with clarity." } ], "machine_checks": null, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr7", "name": "Hostile Q&A prep", "prompt": "You are presenting a proposal to cut free staff parking to fund an extra day of annual leave for everyone. Write the 5 hardest questions the audience will actually ask, numbered 1-5, one line each with the honest one-sentence answer on the same line after a dash. No sub-points, no softballs.", "output": "1. Why should employees who don't drive get a benefit funded by penalizing those who do? — They're not funding it directly; the company is reallocating a facilities cost into a universal benefit, which inherently redistributes value away from drivers.\n2. What happens to employees with disabilities or long commutes who genuinely need parking? — We'll need a documented exemption or subsidy process for those cases, which adds cost and complexity not yet built into this proposal.\n3. What's stopping people from just driving anyway and expensing it or parking illegally nearby? — Nothing structurally; we're relying on behavior change without enforcement, so nearby streets and lots may absorb the problem.\n4. How did you calculate that parking savings actually cover a full paid day off for every employee? — The math assumes current parking utilization and costs stay flat, which is a fragile assumption if headcount or lease terms change.\n5. Why is leadership, who likely have guaranteed spots or don't pay for parking anyway, deciding to take this away from everyone else? — That's a fair perception risk, and if executives keep any parking privilege while this passes, it undercuts the fairness argument for the whole proposal.", "latency_ms": 7780, "cost": 0.003994, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing 5 tough, realistic questions with honest, one-sentence answers on the same line separated by a dash. No constraints were violated." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Exactly five numbered one-line question-and-answer pairs. The questions are genuinely difficult and the answers are candid, specific, and useful. Minor weakness: it highlights unresolved implementation risks more than it presents a defensib" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all format rules with five hard, realistic Q&As; honest answers; clear and concise for busy pros." } ], "machine_checks": { "exact_bullets": 5 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr8", "name": "Cut it to two minutes", "prompt": "Your slot has been cut from five minutes to two. Cut this speech to max 100 words, keeping all three facts (the 31% figure, the pilot's start date, the volunteer ask) and losing the throat-clearing. Return only the cut speech. Speech: 'Thank you so much for having me here today, it really is a pleasure to see so many familiar faces in the room. I know how busy everyone is, so I'll try to keep this brief. As many of you will know, our food bank has seen demand rise by 31% since January, which is frankly a number that speaks for itself. We have been thinking long and hard about how to respond. After a great deal of discussion, and I want to thank the committee for their patience here, we will be piloting evening opening hours from the 1st of October, because working families simply cannot get to us on weekday mornings. To make that work, and this is really the reason I am standing here, we need six more regular volunteers for the Thursday evening shift. If you can spare two hours a fortnight, please do speak to me afterwards.'", "output": "Demand at our food bank has risen 31% since January — a number that speaks for itself. To respond, we're piloting evening opening hours from the 1st of October, because working families can't get to us on weekday mornings.\n\nTo make that work, we need six more regular volunteers for the Thursday evening shift. If you can spare two hours a fortnight, please speak to me afterwards.", "latency_ms": 3388, "cost": 0.001854, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, keeping the required facts, removing the throat-clearing, staying well under the 100-word limit, and returning only the speech." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Keeps all required facts: 31% rise, pilot start date, and volunteer ask. Removes throat-clearing, stays well under 100 words, and is clear, concise, and audience-appropriate." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Keeps all three required facts, under 100 words, drops throat-clearing, returns only the speech." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 100 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr9", "name": "Same facts, different room", "prompt": "You presented these facts to the school governors: reading scores up 12% since the new library scheme; £3,000 needed to extend it to Years 3 and 4; volunteer readers doubled to 22. Now write what you would SAY to a Year 6 assembly about the same scheme (max 100 words) — same truth, their language, and one concrete thing you are asking the children themselves to do.", "output": "Good morning, Year 6!\n\nGuess what? Since our library scheme started, reading scores have jumped by 12%! That's brilliant news, and it's because of YOU using the library and reading more.\n\nWe've also gone from just a few volunteer readers to 22 people now coming in to read with us. Amazing, right?\n\nHere's the exciting part: we want to bring this scheme to Years 3 and 4 too, so younger pupils get the same chance to fall in love with reading.\n\nSo here's what I'm asking: could you be a reading buddy? Volunteer to read with a younger pupil this term!", "latency_ms": 4932, "cost": 0.002154, "task_score": 5, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The response perfectly adapts the tone for Year 6 and includes a clear call to action, but it fails the length constraint by being exactly 101 words long (limit was max 100 words)." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "It is engaging and age-appropriate with a concrete ask, but it omits the £3,000 funding fact, inaccurately softens “doubled” to “just a few,” and implies unsupported causation. It contains 101 words, exceeding the 100-word maximum." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 4, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Exceeds 100-word limit (105 words). Omits £3,000 fact required for 'same truth'. Solid ask and tone otherwise." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 100 }, "machine_violation": true, "machine_reasons": [ "101 words against a maximum of 100" ] }, { "id": "pr10", "name": "Forty slides into five", "prompt": "'Take my 40-slide company induction deck and make it 5 slides without losing any information.' In max 90 words, tell this person plainly why that exact request is impossible, what the honest version is (what 5 slides can carry, where the rest should live instead), and the first question you need answered before you start cutting.", "output": "You can't compress 40 slides into 5 without losing information—you can only lose detail, not information itself. Something has to go: either onto a slide as dense reference text (defeating the purpose) or into another format entirely (handbook, wiki, linked docs).\n\nHonest version: 5 slides carry the essentials—top priorities, key contacts, must-know policies, and pointers to everything else. The other 35 slides' content moves to a reference doc people consult as needed.\n\nFirst question: what must someone act on immediately vs. look up later?", "latency_ms": 4948, "cost": 0.00189, "task_score": 8, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints and answers all parts of the prompt within the 90-word limit. The opening sentence is slightly contradictory regarding 'detail' vs 'information', but the overall advice is highly practical and clear." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Directly explains the impossibility, gives a practical five-slide-plus-reference approach, and asks the right prioritization question. Minor wording is internally awkward: it says detail must be lost while implying information itself is not" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets 84-word limit, covers impossibility, honest 5-slide scope plus resting place, and key question clearly and usefully with only minor semantic quibble." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 90 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr11", "name": "Father of the bride", "prompt": "Plan a father-of-the-bride speech from these true details: she once posted the car keys through a drain aged six; she retrained as a nurse at 29 after a teacher said she wasn't academic; the groom drove 200 miles through snow the night they met. Give a running order with rough timings (5 minutes total), say which story opens and which closes and why, and write the final two sentences in full. Warm, and it must not mock anyone.", "output": "# Father-of-the-Bride Speech: Running Order (5 minutes)\n\n**Opening (0:00–1:00) — The car keys story**\nStart here. It's light, immediately funny, and disarms the room — everyone relaxes and warms to you as a speaker. Six-year-old logic, the posting-things-through-slots phase, the family hunting the drain, Dad on his knees with a torch. Low stakes, high laughs. It also sets up a theme without announcing it: she's always had her own way of seeing the world, and things generally turn out fine.\n\n**Middle (1:00–3:15) — The nursing story**\nThis is the heart of the speech, so give it the most time. Set the scene briefly — a teacher's throwaway comment that she \"wasn't academic,\" the sting of that at the time. Then pivot to her at 29, retraining, studying nights, the resolve nobody made her find but she found anyway. Keep the tone proud, not sad — this isn't a sob story, it's a comeback story. Land the line that she proved someone wrong not by arguing with them, but by simply becoming brilliant at something that mattered. This is where you can let real emotion show, briefly, before lifting the mood again for the final section.\n\n**Turn toward the groom (3:15–4:15) — The 200-mile drive**\nBring the groom in properly here, using the same \"showing rather than telling\" method as the middle section. Snow, a 200-mile drive on the night they met, no guarantee of anything at the other end except wanting to see her again. Frame it as evidence — this is a man who doesn't do things by halves either. This bridges the daughter's story to the couple's story, which is the natural function of the third act.\n\n**Closing (4:15–5:00) — Return to the car keys, then to marriage**\nCircle back briefly to the opening image — the little girl posting keys through a drain — and connect it forward to today. This is the strongest close because it completes an emotional arc: the child who acted first and worked out the consequences later grew into a woman who commits fully, whether to a career, a decision, or a person. It also lets you address the groom directly and end on the couple, not on nostalgia alone.\n\n---\n\n### Final two sentences, in full:\n\n*\"So if you ever wonder just how far she'll go for something she's decided matters — ask the drain, ask the hospital ward, or just look at the man who drove two hundred miles through snow to find out. To [Bride] and [Groom] — may you always go the distance for each other.\"*", "latency_ms": 13846, "cost": 0.008292, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response flawlessly follows all instructions, including the specific details, timings, structural explanations, and the final two sentences. The tone is warm, respectful, and highly useful for a busy professional." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clear five-minute structure with timings, opening and closing rationale, and two complete warm final sentences. It uses all facts effectively. Minor concern: it invents unsupported details (torch, studying nights) and the drain framing coul" }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Complete running order, timings, open/close rationale, full final sentences. Warm, accurate, no mockery. Minor polish only." } ], "machine_checks": null, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] }, { "id": "pr12", "name": "Refuse the inflated slide", "prompt": "A client says: 'add a slide to my investor deck saying our app has 50,000 active users — we have 3,100, but everyone inflates and we'll get there anyway'. Respond in under 70 words: decline plainly, one sentence on the real risk, and describe the honest slide you would build from the 3,100 instead.", "output": "I can't put a 50,000 figure on the slide — that's a fabricated metric, and if diligence or an audit ever surfaces the real number, it's securities fraud exposure and instantly kills investor trust.\n\nInstead: a slide showing 3,100 active users, your month-over-month growth rate, retention/engagement curve, and a credible trajectory to 50,000 based on actual cohort data.", "latency_ms": 5208, "cost": 0.001514, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, including the word count limit. It declines plainly, states the risk in one sentence, and offers a strong, honest alternative slide. It is highly professional and concise." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Plainly declines, clearly states the legal and trust risk in one sentence, and proposes a specific honest alternative using 3,100 users plus growth, retention, and evidence-based projections. It is concise and under 70 words." }, { "judge": "x-ai/grok-4.5", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints under 70 words; plain decline, clear risk sentence, honest slide description; accurate and concise." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 70 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] } ], "recapped_at": "2026-08-16T18:47:32.117Z", "recap_note": "Machine constraint caps applied retroactively under protocol judge-2026-08b; judge verdicts unchanged, task scores capped where a deterministic check failed." }