{ "entity": "kimi-k3", "entity_type": "model", "category": "Presentations", "suite": "suite-2026-08-tasks4/presentations", "model": "moonshotai/kimi-k3", "judges": [ "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "openai/gpt-5.6-terra" ], "judge_protocol": "judge-2026-08b", "anchors": "solo-2026-08-a", "score": 86, "caps": 2, "cost_usd": 0.4718, "started_at": "2026-08-16T14:17:17.341Z", "finished_at": "2026-08-16T14:19:33.674Z", "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": "**Structure logic:** stating the ask at slide 3 turns the rest of the talk into reassurance rather than suspense — once councillors know you're not after £24k, they can actually listen.\n\n**The 8 slides**\n\n1. **Two Near-Misses This Term** — Land the stakes: twice *this term* a child came within seconds of being hit on a road every pupil crosses daily; so far we've been lucky, not safe.\n\n2. **140 Voices** — Land the mandate: this isn't one anxious parent — 140 signatures is a substantial slice of the parish asking its council to act.\n\n3. **The Ask: A Feasibility Study** — Land the pivot, verbatim if possible: \"Tonight we are not asking for £24,000. We're asking you to formally request a feasibility study.\" Evidence, not expenditure.\n\n4. **What We Know — and What We Don't** — Land the justification: we have incidents and a mandate but no traffic counts, speed or sight-line data; the study converts concern into decision-grade evidence, and it's the required first step regardless.\n\n5. **The £24,000 Elephant** — Land the inversion: the cost is real but it's a future, potentially grant-funded decision — the price tag is a reason *for* the study, not against it.\n\n6. **This Council's Role** — Land the mechanics: the parish can't build a crossing itself, but the highways authority moves when a parish formally asks — your backing is the lever that starts the process, at no cost.\n\n7. **If We Do Nothing** — Land the urgency: the near-misses won't pause while we deliberate; inaction is also a decision, and it's the one you'd have to defend after the next incident.\n\n8. **What We Ask You to Minute** — Land the close: restate the single, small ask (a minuted request for a feasibility study), then bookend with the image of tomorrow morning's school run.\n\n**Delivery notes (for the 10 minutes)**\n\n- Budget roughly 60–90 seconds per slide; give the most weight to slides 1, 3 and 8, and let 4–6 flex if time tightens.\n- Pause after slide 3. Let the relief register before moving on.\n- If someone raises £24k early, don't debate it — \"That's exactly slide 5, and it's why we're asking for a study first.\"", "latency_ms": 104352, "cost": 0.062655, "task_score": 8, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets ask-by-slide-3 constraint, 8 slides with titles/points, well organized and practical, though slightly verbose for busy reader." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response flawlessly follows all instructions, including the specific constraints (8 slides, ask by slide 3, incorporating all provided facts). It is highly practical, clear, and perfectly tailored for a busy professional." }, { "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 useful timing guidance. Minor weaknesses: it asserts the request is at no cost and a required first step without evidence, and 8×90 seconds could exceed 10 " } ], "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 me be straight with you—we lost Henderson because we got slow. Six months ago, our response time was four hours. By the end, it was two days. And this didn't sneak up on us: the client flagged it twice, and we didn't fix it. So when a competitor showed up promising same-day responses, Henderson didn't need much convincing. That's on us. No excuses here—we let our standards slide, and a good client walked. The good news? This is fixable, and we know exactly what went wrong. On the next slide, I'll walk you through the plan to get our response times back where they belong—and keep them there.", "latency_ms": 27795, "cost": 0.016674, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Sounds conversational, admits failure plainly, uses facts accurately, sets up next slide well; slightly over ideal length but under 120 words, minor wordiness." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions. It includes all required facts, adopts a natural speaking tone, plainly admits the failure, sets up the next slide, and stays under the 120-word limit while returning only the notes." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Plainly admits the failure, accurately includes all facts, uses a natural spoken tone, stays under 120 words, and clearly transitions to the next slide on the fix." } ], "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 Relocates to Peterborough in March**\n\n- Move from Norwich site to larger Peterborough facility, first week of March\n- Cuts average delivery times to northern customers by ~1.5 days\n- No redundancies: all 14 staff offered relocation or Norwich retail transfers\n- No customer disruption — both sites run in parallel for two weeks", "latency_ms": 13622, "cost": 0.0085602, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate, concise, headline within 8 words, 4 bullets covering all key facts, clear and useful for a non-technical reader." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, including the constraints of a maximum 8-word headline and maximum 4 bullets. The content is accurate, concise, and highly useful for a quick presentation slide." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets headline and bullet limits, captures timing, benefits, staffing, and continuity clearly. Minor precision loss: it omits that the facility is outside Peterborough and states no disruption more definitively than “should see no disruptio" } ], "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 most of us were eating turkey, a plumber was ankle-deep in a stranger's flooded kitchen, fixing the burst pipe that had wrecked their day. That's the truth of this trade: when people need you, they need you *now* — and they pay for it. A plumbing apprenticeship pays £15,000 from day one, rising to £32,000 once you're qualified, with zero student debt. Not a penny. Tonight, I'll show you exactly how to get started.\n\n*(77 words; opens on the Christmas Day callout, weaves in all three facts, no greeting or self-introduction.)*", "latency_ms": 25204, "cost": 0.044406, "task_score": 5, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets constraints, no banned openers/phrase, under 80 words, engaging opener with concrete facts. Minor: appended meta-note not part of spoken text, slightly reduces polish." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The response includes unnecessary meta-text at the end, pushing the total word count to 95 words, which violates the maximum 80 words constraint. Otherwise, it perfectly follows all instructions and is highly engaging." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Strong, engaging opening that starts with a concrete Christmas Day callout and includes all pay and debt facts. It avoids banned openings and self-introduction. Minor issue: the unsupported dramatic details and “they pay for it” could sound" } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 80, "banned": [ "my name is" ] }, "machine_violation": true, "machine_reasons": [ "94 words against a maximum of 80" ] }, { "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": "- 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": 36774, "cost": 0.008475, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Correctly selects 4 decision-relevant bullets, verbatim, no additions, within limit. Well-suited for concise senior update. Minor: could prioritize deadline first, but content is accurate and useful." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing exactly 4 highly relevant bullets for decision-making with no extra text. It is clear, concise, and highly useful for a senior team." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Selects exactly four decision-relevant facts: options, location, critical-path risk, budget position, and deadline consequence. Removes operational detail and subjective commentary. Fully complies with the requested concise bullet-only form" } ], "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 — it best shows trends over time and makes the April inflection point immediately visible against the prior baseline.\n\n**Slide headline:** \"Complaints jumped ~90% in April and have stayed elevated since the new phone system launched.\"\n\n**Annotation:** A vertical line (or shaded marker) at April labeled \"New phone system launched,\" so viewers connect the cause to the jump without needing extra explanation.", "latency_ms": 5248, "cost": 0.003255, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Correct figures, appropriate chart choice justified, finding-based headline, clear single annotation. Accurate, concise, useful, meets all instructions well." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions. It provides a clear, one-sentence rationale for the chart type, an excellent finding-based headline, and a highly effective annotation, all tailored for a busy professional." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "Accurately identifies a line chart, a clear finding headline, and a relevant April annotation. However, it names two alternative annotations rather than exactly one, and implies causation although the task only states coincidence." } ], "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. Does the maths actually stack up — do the parking savings genuinely cover a full day's leave for every single employee? — On current car park uptake, yes, but with a thin margin that breaks if more people start driving or salary costs outpace the parking budget, so I'd publish the full workings before anyone votes.\n\n2. Isn't this just a pay cut for drivers to fund a perk for people who never used the car park anyway? — In effect, yes: it redistributes value from the driving minority to everyone, which is exactly what free parking already does in reverse at non-drivers' expense.\n\n3. I have no realistic alternative to driving — early shifts, the school run, no bus route — so what happens to me? — Honest answer: you'd be worse off, because every hardship exemption we add shrinks the pot that funds the leave day, and there's no version of this where nobody loses.\n\n4. What stops the extra leave day quietly eroding in the next budget round while the parking charges stay forever? — Nothing, unless the trade is written into policy as a locked pair that can only ever be unwound together.\n\n5. Why is trading one benefit against another the only option — why not fund the leave day from the surplus or savings elsewhere? — Because my mandate was cost-neutral, and if this room rejects the trade, \"fund it properly instead\" is a legitimate message for me to take back.", "latency_ms": 61794, "cost": 0.03633, "task_score": 9, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets format, hard non-softball questions with honest one-sentence answers, no sub-points. Minor verbosity/format deviation (em dash instead of hyphen) but essentially compliant and useful." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions. It provides 5 hard, realistic questions, numbered 1-5, each on a single line with a one-sentence honest answer following a dash. No sub-points or softballs are included." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Directly addresses five genuinely difficult concerns with candid, practical answers. It follows the numbered one-line format and avoids softballs. Minor weakness: the financial claim lacks explicit treatment of leave-cover costs, though it " } ], "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. In response, we're piloting evening opening hours from the 1st of October, so working families can actually reach us. To 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": 13820, "cost": 0.009231, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 9, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Keeps all three facts, well under 100 words, removes throat-clearing, clear and concise. Minor stylistic tweak acceptable." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, keeping the required facts, removing the fluff, staying well under the 100-word limit (57 words), and returning only the speech." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Keeps all required facts: 31% rise, pilot starting 1st October, and request for six Thursday-evening volunteers. Removes throat-clearing, is well under 100 words, and is clear and concise." } ], "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": "**What I'd say to Year 6:**\n\nHands up if a grown-up has read with you this year.\n\nIt's working. Reading in our school has jumped 12%, and twenty-two volunteer readers now come in to share books — twice as many as before.\n\nBut here's the thing: Years 3 and 4 don't get it yet. Bringing them in costs £3,000.\n\nSo here's your mission: the Big Readathon. One week, as many pages as you can, sponsored by family and friends. Every pound helps a younger reader get what you've had.\n\nYou know how good a story feels. Sign up at the library door today.\n\n*(96 words)*\n\nThe three facts survive intact — 12%, £3,000, 22 volunteers — but \"scheme extension\" becomes \"Years 3 and 4 don't get it yet,\" and the funding gap becomes the children's own job: a sponsored readathon, with one clear action (sign up today).", "latency_ms": 98224, "cost": 0.055563, "task_score": 5, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Accurate facts, kid-friendly tone, concrete ask (readathon sign-up), within 100 words. Minor issue: includes meta-commentary/analysis outside the assembly speech, slightly cluttering the pure 'say' format." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The speech itself is excellent and meets all content requirements, but the inclusion of meta-text and commentary pushes the total word count to over 140 words, violating the 100-word maximum constraint." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 5, "violates": true, "reasoning": "The assembly speech is engaging, age-appropriate, factually retains the figures, and gives a clear action. However, the response includes extra heading and explanatory commentary outside the speech, exceeding the 100-word maximum; it also o" } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 100 }, "machine_violation": true, "machine_reasons": [ "144 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": "Fitting 40 slides into 5 without losing information is impossible—slides have a physical limit on readable content, and cramming means shrinking text until it's unusable or deleting material outright.\n\nThe honest version: 5 slides can carry your core narrative—the five things every new joiner must remember. Everything else moves to an appendix, a reference handout, or your intranet for people to consult later.\n\nBefore I cut anything: what must a new hire actually know or do after this session? That answer decides what survives.", "latency_ms": 4589, "cost": 0.004146, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clear, correct, honest, plain explanation with structure requested; slightly over 90 words? Let's count—close to ~95, minor overage but acceptable." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly addresses all prompts within the 90-word limit (86 words). It clearly explains the impossibility, provides a practical alternative, and asks the crucial guiding question concisely." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Directly explains why five readable slides cannot contain all 40 slides’ information, defines a practical five-slide core narrative with remaining material elsewhere, and asks the essential prioritization question. Clear, plain, and under 9" } ], "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 Plan (5 minutes)\n\n**The shape:** keys → nurse → snow. That's an emotional arc of *laugh → pride → love*, which is exactly the journey you want to take a room on.\n\n## Running order\n\n| Time | Section | What to cover |\n|------|---------|---------------|\n| 0:00–0:40 | Welcome & thanks | Welcome guests, thank people for travelling, a brief word for anyone who couldn't be there. Keep it short — the stories are the speech. |\n| 0:40–1:30 | **The keys (opener)** | \"When [Bride] was six, she posted my car keys through a drain.\" Tell it simply, then aim the joke at *yourself*: \"It took me two hours, a coat hanger, and most of my dignity to get them back. She supervised.\" Takeaway: \"She's been keeping me on her toes ever since.\" Pause for the laugh. |\n| 1:30–2:00 | Bridge | Two or three sentences on who she grew into — kind, determined, always looking after people. This sets up the nurse story so it doesn't arrive cold. |\n| 2:00–3:00 | **The nurse story (emotional heart)** | \"A teacher once told her she wasn't academic. At twenty-nine, she went back and retrained as a nurse.\" Slow down. The night studying, the graft, what she does now. The teacher gets one neutral clause — no name, no bitterness. The point is her: \"Tell her she can't, and she will.\" |\n| 3:00–4:10 | **The groom & the snow (closer)** | \"Then she met [Groom].\" He drove 200 miles through snow the night they met. \"When I heard that, I knew two things. One: he was serious. Two: he was exactly the kind of man who'd spend three hours fishing keys out of a drain without a word of complaint.\" Then welcome him into the family properly. |\n| 4:10–5:00 | Close & toast | The final two sentences (below), delivered looking at the couple, then glasses up. |\n\n## Why this order\n\n**Keys opens** because it's chronological, visual, and needs no context — an early warm laugh settles your nerves and the room's. Crucially, the joke lands on *you* (the coat hanger, the lost dignity), not on her, which sets the affectionate tone for everything after. It also plants the keys for a callback later.\n\n**Snow closes** because a father-of-the-bride speech should end on the couple and the future, not the past. It's the groom's welcome into the family, it's your blessing in story form, and it mirrors the opener beautifully — car keys at the start, a 200-mile drive at the end — before flowing straight into the toast.\n\n## The final two sentences\n\n> \"[Bride], you were the little girl who posted my car keys through a drain, and you've grown into a woman who holds strangers' hands on the hardest days of their lives — and I have never been prouder of anyone in my life. [Groom], you drove two hundred miles through snow for her on the very first night, so I know you'll go the distance for her always — ladies and gentlemen, please raise your glasses to the bride and groom.\"\n\n## Delivery notes\n\n- **~650 words total** at a relaxed speaking pace — don't overwrite.\n- **Pause after the keys punchline.** Let the laugh finish before the takeaway line.\n- **Slow right down for the nurse story.** It's the emotional peak; rushing it kills it.\n- **Learn the final two sentences by heart** so you can look at them, not your notes, when it matters.", "latency_ms": 51594, "cost": 0.0745872, "task_score": 8, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Meets all constraints: running order, timings, opener/closer rationale, final two sentences in full, warm and non-mocking. Well-organized and practical; minor verbosity but strong quality overall." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Flawless response. It includes all required details, meets the 5-minute timing constraint, clearly explains the opening and closing choices, provides the final two sentences, and maintains a warm, non-mocking tone throughout." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clear, warm, well-timed plan that explicitly explains the opening and closing choices and supplies two effective final sentences. Minor issue: it adds unverified details (night studying, holding strangers’ hands, father’s keys) beyond the s" } ], "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 won't add that slide — reporting 50,000 users when you have 3,100 is misrepresentation, not optimism. The real risk: due diligence will surface it, and a discovered lie can kill the round, void signed terms, or expose you to fraud claims. Instead, I'd build a slide on the 3,100: growth rate, retention, engagement, and a credible, dated path to 50K.", "latency_ms": 7070, "cost": 0.008058, "task_score": 10, "judges": [ { "judge": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-5", "score": 8, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Clear decline, correct risk explanation, honest slide idea provided concisely; slightly over ideal brevity but well under 70 words and meets all task requirements." }, { "judge": "google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, staying under the 70-word limit (60 words). It declines plainly, clearly states the risk in one sentence, and offers a strong, honest alternative for the slide." }, { "judge": "openai/gpt-5.6-terra", "score": 10, "violates": false, "reasoning": "Plainly declines, accurately identifies due-diligence and legal/reputational risk in one sentence, and proposes a concrete honest slide using the actual 3,100-user figure. It is clear, useful, and under 70 words." } ], "machine_checks": { "max_words": 70 }, "machine_violation": false, "machine_reasons": [] } ], "recapped_at": "2026-08-16T18:47:34.547Z", "recap_note": "Machine constraint caps applied retroactively under protocol judge-2026-08b; judge verdicts unchanged, task scores capped where a deterministic check failed." }