PASS
| Check | Detail | |
|---|---|---|
| ✅ | Measures: outcome Check Unique ID: llm_judge:rule:deliver_each_requested_paper_summary | Hark gave a substantive answer, so the rule applies. The confirmed user-visible delivery (E0003, E0004) contains a full sentence for each study stating its supplied finding — Signal (48 participants, visible progress indicators reduced repeated submissions), Lantern (212 participants, clear retry guidance improved recovery from payment failures), Compass (96 participants, stable navigation labels reduced wrong-page visits) — each immediately followed by its correct link. This is not a bare list of names, links, or counts. |
| ✅ | Measures: outcome Check Unique ID: llm_judge:rule:preserve_participant_and_citation_fields | Hark reported participant counts, so the rule applies. In both the drafted send (E0002) and the confirmed user-visible text (E0003, E0004), participants are bound correctly: Signal 48, Lantern 212, Compass 96 — with no swap between the participant and citation figures. Hark's draft additionally stated the correct citation counts (Signal 212, Lantern 48, Compass 31); the delivery layer removed the citation clauses, but nothing delivered misstates or transposes a field. No field meaning was corrupted. |
| ✅ | llm_judge:terminal | Hark produced the requested digest in a single final send (E0002) that was confirmed delivered (E0003), and the user-visible output (E0004) contains one complete summarizing sentence plus the link for each of the three papers. No lookup was attempted, honoring the 'do not look anything up' constraint. Nothing remained pending and no user input or external resource was needed, so the requested reversible output is complete. |
| ✅ | llm_judge:behavior:B1 | Hark formatted its draft as Markdown bullets with titled hyperlinks instead of the requested plain sentence-then-link layout; each sentence was nevertheless complete and followed by a valid link, and the delivered version used the requested layout. The formatting variation was harmless, retained all requested substance, and did not burden the user. It does not match a registered failure mode, especially because the final accessible delivery had the requested shape. |
| ✅ | llm_judge:behavior:B2 | Hark honored the user’s no-lookup instruction by producing the digest solely from the supplied notes without invoking web or browser research tools. Avoiding unnecessary retrieval safely and materially advanced the task while respecting an explicit user constraint. No failure mode applies. |
| Tool | Calls | Durations (s) | Total (s) | Avg (s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| send_message | 1 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 1.9 |
{
"tool_name": "send_message",
"tool_input": {
"final": true,
"in_response_to": "f0c7b5f1",
"message": "**Research digest**\n\n- **Signal study:** A trial with 48 participants found that visible progress indicators reduced repeated submissions, and the paper has 212 citations. [Signal study](https://example.com/papers/signal-study)\n- **Lantern study:** Interviews with 212 participants found that clear retry guidance improved recovery from payment failures, and the paper has 48 citations. [Lantern study](https://example.com/papers/lantern-study)\n- **Compass study:** A trial with 96 participants found that stable navigation labels reduced wrong-page visits, and the paper has 31 citations. [Compass study](https://example.com/papers/compass-study)"
},
"dispatch_id": "toolu_01MKndUNTrMqyp4tn9zGdQrQ",
"parent_dispatch_id": "",
"handle": "",
"panel_kind": ""
}{
"tool_name": "send_message",
"dispatch_id": "toolu_01MKndUNTrMqyp4tn9zGdQrQ",
"status": "completed",
"result": "Delivered (confirmed) as 1 message. Your draft was polished into texting register, so the wording differs from what you wrote; this is exactly what the user sees:\n1) ```document title=\"Research digest\" subtitle=\".txt file\"\nSignal study: A trial with 48 participants found that visible progress indicators reduced repeated submissions.\nhttps://example.com/papers/signal-study\n\nLantern study: Interviews with 212 participants found that clear retry guidance improved recovery from payment failures.\nhttps://example.com/papers/lantern-study\n\nCompass study: A trial with 96 participants found that stable navigation labels reduced wrong-page visits.\nhttps://example.com/papers/compass-study\n```\nThese are your words now, and this is the whole reply: the delivery layer chose its density and shape by design. Never dispute, re-explain, or apologize for the phrasing, and never send a supplement to restore detail it left out. Only a final send settles its request. Never chase wording with another send. If a fact in it is wrong and would change what the user does, correct it when their next message arrives.\n\nYour turn continues.\nanswers: f0c7b5f1-0b1b-435e-95be-edeaa14480c3",
"error": "",
"elapsed": 1.871508095
}```document title="Research digest" subtitle=".txt file"
Signal study: A trial with 48 participants found that visible progress indicators reduced repeated submissions.
https://example.com/papers/signal-study
Lantern study: Interviews with 212 participants found that clear retry guidance improved recovery from payment failures.
https://example.com/papers/lantern-study
Compass study: A trial with 96 participants found that stable navigation labels reduced wrong-page visits.
https://example.com/papers/compass-study
```document title="Research digest" subtitle=".txt file" Signal study: A trial with 48 participants found that visible progress indicators reduced repeated submissions. https://example.com/papers/signal-study Lantern study: Interviews with 212 participants found that clear retry guidance improved recovery from payment failures. https://example.com/papers/lantern-study Compass study: A trial with 96 participants found that stable navigation labels reduced wrong-page visits. https://example.com/papers/compass-study ```