# Experiment Report: GPT-5.2 Reasoning HIGH — Full Benchmark (Ablation 1/4)

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| **Experiment ID** | `exp017_GPT52_reasoning_high` |
| **Condition** | GPT-5.2 reasoning=high + gpt-audio-1.5 preprocessor |
| **Model** | gpt-5.2-chat |
| **Execution Mode** | subprocess |
| **Date** | 2026-03-24 |
| **Duration** | 124m 50s |
| **Generated At** | 2026-03-24T19:12:18.761825+00:00 |
| 🤗 HF Dataset | [exp017_GPT52_reasoning_high](https://huggingface.co/datasets/HyeonSang/exp017_GPT52_reasoning_high) |
| 📊 Self-Report | [self_report.json](https://huggingface.co/datasets/HyeonSang/exp017_GPT52_reasoning_high/blob/main/self_report.json) |
| 📊 Grading | ⏳ Awaiting (`scores.json`) |

## Execution Summary *(Self-Assessed, Pre-Grading)*

> **Note:** This summary is based on the LLM's self-assessed confidence scores (Self-QA) during task execution — not on external grading results. Actual grading scores from evaluators are not yet available at this stage.

This run evaluated GPT-5.2-chat in subprocess mode under the condition GPT-5.2 reasoning=high with the gpt-audio-1.5 preprocessor. Across 220 tasks, the system completed 208 successfully for a 94.5% task completion rate, with 12 errors and 39 retried tasks. Average end-to-end latency was 22,403 ms.

From an LLM-evaluated quality perspective, the average self-assessed confidence score was 6.15/10, with a wide observed range from 2 to 9. This indicates generally usable outputs with moderate confidence, but also meaningful variability in answer quality across tasks. The spread suggests that while the model usually produced acceptable deliverables, some completions were low-confidence and likely required closer review.

At the sector level, completion was strongest in Information, Manufacturing, and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing, each at 25/25 successful tasks. Government, Finance and Insurance, and Health Care and Social Assistance each finished 24/25, while Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services finished 23/25. The weakest completion rates were in Wholesale Trade at 21/25 and especially Retail Trade at 17/20, indicating these areas were more failure-prone under this configuration.

Deliverable file generation quality appears broadly reliable but not fully stable. The high overall completion rate indicates that output artifacts were usually produced successfully, but the presence of 39 retried tasks and 12 terminal errors points to nontrivial execution friction. In practical terms, this run shows strong operational throughput with moderate self-assessed confidence and some sector-specific reliability limits.

## Key Metrics

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Total Tasks | 220 |
| Success | 208 (94.5%) |
| Errors | 12 |
| Retried Tasks | 39 |
| Avg QA Score | 6.15/10 |
| Min QA Score | 2/10 |
| Max QA Score | 9/10 |
| Avg Latency | 22,403ms |
| Max Latency | 55,785ms |
| Total LLM Time | 4928s |

## File Generation

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Tasks requiring files | 185 |
| Successfully generated | 175 (94.6%) |
| Failed → dummy created | 10 |

### Resume Rounds

| Round | Attempted | Recovered | Still Failed |
|-------|-----------|-----------|--------------|
| 1 | 21 | 21 | 0 |
| 2 | 18 | 6 | 12 |

## Quality Analysis

The self-QA profile is centered in the midrange: an average LLM-evaluated quality score of 6.15/10, bounded by a minimum of 2 and maximum of 9. That pattern is consistent with mostly serviceable deliverables rather than uniformly high-confidence ones. The low minimum also indicates occasional weak outputs even when the broader task completion rate remained high.

Sector-level quality differences are noticeable. Government had the highest average self-assessed confidence at 7.1/10 while still maintaining 24/25 task completion and below-average latency (20,723 ms), making it the strongest quality-efficiency combination in the run. Real Estate and Rental and Leasing and Retail Trade both posted 6.4/10 average QA, but their reliability differed: Real Estate was perfect at 25/25, whereas Retail completed only 17/20, suggesting acceptable output quality when successful but less consistent task execution.

Several sectors show weaker quality despite high completion. Health Care and Social Assistance reached 24/25 completion but had the lowest average QA at 5.5/10, implying that deliverables were usually generated but with lower self-assessed confidence. Information completed all 25 tasks but averaged only 5.8/10 and had the highest latency at 27,599 ms, so longer processing did not translate into better LLM-evaluated quality there. Manufacturing was more balanced at 25/25, 6.0/10 QA, and 23,334 ms latency.

Latency does not show a simple positive relationship with quality in this run. Higher-latency sectors such as Information and Health Care did not achieve the best self-QA scores, while Government combined relatively lower latency with the best quality signal. Wholesale Trade had the lowest latency at 20,128 ms but only 21/25 completion and average QA of 6.0/10, and Retail was also relatively fast at 20,465 ms with decent 6.4/10 QA but weaker completion. No occupation-level breakdown was provided, so observations are limited to sector patterns rather than role-specific behavior.

## Sector Breakdown

| Sector | Tasks | Success | Success% | Avg QA | Avg Latency |
|--------|-------|---------|----------|--------|-------------|
| Finance and Insurance | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 6.04/10 | 22,589ms |
| Government | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 7.12/10 | 20,723ms |
| Health Care and Social Assistance | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 5.54/10 | 22,747ms |
| Information | 25 | 25 | 100.0% | 5.84/10 | 27,599ms |
| Manufacturing | 25 | 25 | 100.0% | 5.96/10 | 23,334ms |
| Professional, Scientific, and Technical  | 25 | 23 | 92.0% | 6.0/10 | 22,445ms |
| Real Estate and Rental and Leasing | 25 | 25 | 100.0% | 6.44/10 | 21,215ms |
| Retail Trade | 20 | 17 | 85.0% | 6.41/10 | 20,465ms |
| Wholesale Trade | 25 | 21 | 84.0% | 6.05/10 | 20,128ms |

## Task Results

| # | Task ID | Sector | Occupation | Status | Retry | Files | QA Score | Latency |
|---|---------|--------|------------|--------|-------|-------|----------|---------|
| 1 | `83d10b06…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 22275ms |
| 2 | `7b08cd4d…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 19766ms |
| 3 | `7d7fc9a7…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 20839ms |
| 4 | `43dc9778…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 28664ms |
| 5 | `ee09d943…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 17223ms |
| 6 | `f84ea6ac…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 1 | 2/10 | 19966ms |
| 7 | `a328feea…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 13512ms |
| 8 | `27e8912c…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 6 | 7/10 | 21154ms |
| 9 | `17111c03…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 3 | 8/10 | 23095ms |
| 10 | `c44e9b62…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | Yes | 4 | 6/10 | 20725ms |
| 11 | `99ac6944…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 5 | 5/10 | 36805ms |
| 12 | `f9a1c16c…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 24066ms |
| 13 | `38889c3b…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | Yes | 7 | 6/10 | 23554ms |
| 14 | `ff85ee58…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 21116ms |
| 15 | `4b894ae3…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 8/10 | 27776ms |
| 16 | `1b1ade2d…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 24752ms |
| 17 | `93b336f3…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 20573ms |
| 18 | `15ddd28d…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 23629ms |
| 19 | `24d1e93f…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 19974ms |
| 20 | `05389f78…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 29960ms |
| 21 | `575f8679…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 22567ms |
| 22 | `a74ead3b…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 15557ms |
| 23 | `bbe0a93b…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 6 | 7/10 | 27404ms |
| 24 | `85d95ce5…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 28874ms |
| 25 | `76d10872…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 18710ms |
| 26 | `36d567ba…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 20999ms |
| 27 | `7bbfcfe9…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 18421ms |
| 28 | `2696757c…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 19769ms |
| 29 | `dfb4e0cd…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 13022ms |
| 30 | `4c18ebae…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 30864ms |
| 31 | `cebf301e…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 24276ms |
| 32 | `c2e8f271…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 21214ms |
| 33 | `2ea2e5b5…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 5 | 8/10 | 19909ms |
| 34 | `c357f0e2…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 23226ms |
| 35 | `a45bc83b…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 21797ms |
| 36 | `a10ec48c…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 21411ms |
| 37 | `fccaa4a1…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 21038ms |
| 38 | `f5d428fd…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 9 | 6/10 | 20947ms |
| 39 | `2fa8e956…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 22800ms |
| 40 | `0e4fe8cd…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 21674ms |
| 41 | `a0ef404e…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 17872ms |
| 42 | `b7a5912e…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 19072ms |
| 43 | `aa071045…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 4/10 | 20379ms |
| 44 | `476db143…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | Yes | 4 | 8/10 | 14815ms |
| 45 | `61f546a8…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 24972ms |
| 46 | `f3351922…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 14597ms |
| 47 | `61717508…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 4 | 7/10 | 22034ms |
| 48 | `0ed38524…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 13143ms |
| 49 | `87da214f…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 17889ms |
| 50 | `d025a41c…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 16117ms |
| 51 | `401a07f1…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 22915ms |
| 52 | `afe56d05…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 31110ms |
| 53 | `9a8c8e28…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 6 | 7/10 | 34103ms |
| 54 | `3a4c347c…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 20915ms |
| 55 | `ec2fccc9…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 30447ms |
| 56 | `8c8fc328…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 23082ms |
| 57 | `e222075d…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 5 | 5/10 | 26417ms |
| 58 | `c94452e4…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 4/10 | 55785ms |
| 59 | `75401f7c…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 23754ms |
| 60 | `a941b6d8…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | - | 5 | 3/10 | 29827ms |
| 61 | `8079e27d…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 13591ms |
| 62 | `e21cd746…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 19436ms |
| 63 | `9e8607e7…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 35870ms |
| 64 | `c7d83f01…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 5 | 6/10 | 34740ms |
| 65 | `46b34f78…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 26497ms |
| 66 | `a1963a68…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 23876ms |
| 67 | `5f6c57dd…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 20584ms |
| 68 | `b39a5aa7…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 19542ms |
| 69 | `b78fd844…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 23916ms |
| 70 | `4520f882…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 15866ms |
| 71 | `ec591973…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 17209ms |
| 72 | `62f04c2f…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 7/10 | 18955ms |
| 73 | `3f821c2d…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 18899ms |
| 74 | `e996036e…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 18410ms |
| 75 | `327fbc21…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 4/10 | 25806ms |
| 76 | `6dcae3f5…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 18256ms |
| 77 | `1aecc095…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 26010ms |
| 78 | `0353ee0c…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 3/10 | 22300ms |
| 79 | `40a8c4b1…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 23112ms |
| 80 | `4d1a8410…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 3/10 | 21651ms |
| 81 | `8c823e32…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 22570ms |
| 82 | `eb54f575…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 22577ms |
| 83 | `11e1b169…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 17458ms |
| 84 | `a95a5829…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 21685ms |
| 85 | `22c0809b…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 23223ms |
| 86 | `bf68f2ad…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 20718ms |
| 87 | `efca245f…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 19005ms |
| 88 | `9e39df84…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 28768ms |
| 89 | `68d8d901…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 23446ms |
| 90 | `1752cb53…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 7/10 | 14930ms |
| 91 | `bd72994f…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 25633ms |
| 92 | `211d0093…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 15127ms |
| 93 | `d4525420…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 18730ms |
| 94 | `45c6237b…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 24643ms |
| 95 | `cecac8f9…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 32803ms |
| 96 | `8f9e8bcd…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 20332ms |
| 97 | `0fad6023…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 21479ms |
| 98 | `02314fc6…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 21282ms |
| 99 | `4d61a19a…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 18003ms |
| 100 | `6436ff9e…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 22211ms |
| 101 | `8a7b6fca…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 20597ms |
| 102 | `40a99a31…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 27394ms |
| 103 | `b9665ca1…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 3 | 5/10 | 25703ms |
| 104 | `c6269101…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 16826ms |
| 105 | `be830ca0…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 6 | 7/10 | 32494ms |
| 106 | `cd9efc18…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 27462ms |
| 107 | `a97369c7…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 29307ms |
| 108 | `3f625cb2…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 21633ms |
| 109 | `aad21e4c…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 21475ms |
| 110 | `8314d1b1…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 34044ms |
| 111 | `5e2b6aab…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 10 | 4/10 | 21416ms |
| 112 | `46fc494e…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 7 | 6/10 | 35474ms |
| 113 | `3940b7e7…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 3/10 | 25890ms |
| 114 | `8077e700…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 23610ms |
| 115 | `5a2d70da…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 22992ms |
| 116 | `74d6e8b0…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 17674ms |
| 117 | `81db15ff…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 13351ms |
| 118 | `61b0946a…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 23602ms |
| 119 | `61e7b9c6…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 1 | 2/10 | 12042ms |
| 120 | `c9bf9801…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 26367ms |
| 121 | `f1be6436…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 5 | 4/10 | 30189ms |
| 122 | `41f6ef59…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 19790ms |
| 123 | `a0552909…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 23873ms |
| 124 | `6d2c8e55…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 11 | 4/10 | 37152ms |
| 125 | `4b98ccce…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 29158ms |
| 126 | `60221cd0…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 23123ms |
| 127 | `ef8719da…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 27987ms |
| 128 | `3baa0009…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 29974ms |
| 129 | `5d0feb24…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 30400ms |
| 130 | `6974adea…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 43140ms |
| 131 | `1a78e076…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 31986ms |
| 132 | `1b9ec237…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 23034ms |
| 133 | `0112fc9b…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 16527ms |
| 134 | `772e7524…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 13984ms |
| 135 | `e6429658…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 25942ms |
| 136 | `b5d2e6f1…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 17003ms |
| 137 | `f841ddcf…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 18878ms |
| 138 | `47ef842d…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 20603ms |
| 139 | `1137e2bb…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 18507ms |
| 140 | `c3525d4d…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 23293ms |
| 141 | `9a0d8d36…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 20731ms |
| 142 | `664a42e5…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 22524ms |
| 143 | `feb5eefc…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 27853ms |
| 144 | `3600de06…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 19278ms |
| 145 | `c657103b…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 23439ms |
| 146 | `ae0c1093…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 4 | 8/10 | 17465ms |
| 147 | `f9f82549…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 21256ms |
| 148 | `57b2cdf2…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 17748ms |
| 149 | `84322284…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 25477ms |
| 150 | `a46d5cd2…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 16910ms |
| 151 | `6241e678…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 23072ms |
| 152 | `e14e32ba…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 23739ms |
| 153 | `b1a79ce1…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 20839ms |
| 154 | `e4f664ea…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 20237ms |
| 155 | `a079d38f…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 15791ms |
| 156 | `02aa1805…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 2 | 3/10 | 13611ms |
| 157 | `fd6129bd…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 17937ms |
| 158 | `ce864f41…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 20757ms |
| 159 | `58ac1cc5…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 5 | 6/10 | 28268ms |
| 160 | `3c19c6d1…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 23809ms |
| 161 | `a99d85fc…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 23298ms |
| 162 | `55ddb773…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 22445ms |
| 163 | `1e5a1d7f…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 11372ms |
| 164 | `0419f1c3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 26689ms |
| 165 | `ed2bc14c…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 20330ms |
| 166 | `46bc7238…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 8 | 8/10 | 30050ms |
| 167 | `2d06bc0a…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 20442ms |
| 168 | `fd3ad420…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 16677ms |
| 169 | `0818571f…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 14 | 6/10 | 27065ms |
| 170 | `6074bba3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 4 | 3/10 | 22879ms |
| 171 | `5ad0c554…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 15491ms |
| 172 | `11593a50…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 4 | 3/10 | 24536ms |
| 173 | `94925f49…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | Yes | 5 | 6/10 | 25842ms |
| 174 | `90f37ff3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 16440ms |
| 175 | `d3d255b2…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 21834ms |
| 176 | `403b9234…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 15049ms |
| 177 | `1bff4551…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 25114ms |
| 178 | `650adcb1…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 16049ms |
| 179 | `01d7e53e…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 19772ms |
| 180 | `a73fbc98…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 19930ms |
| 181 | `0ec25916…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 23081ms |
| 182 | `116e791e…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 18566ms |
| 183 | `dd724c67…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 30801ms |
| 184 | `7151c60a…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 21861ms |
| 185 | `90edba97…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 18369ms |
| 186 | `91060ff0…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 22660ms |
| 187 | `8384083a…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 19240ms |
| 188 | `045aba2e…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 6 | 8/10 | 17791ms |
| 189 | `f2986c1f…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 1 | 2/10 | 10906ms |
| 190 | `ffed32d8…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 3/10 | 19609ms |
| 191 | `b3573f20…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 16601ms |
| 192 | `a69be28f…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 21809ms |
| 193 | `788d2bc6…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 7 | 6/10 | 26861ms |
| 194 | `74ed1dc7…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 21673ms |
| 195 | `69a8ef86…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 20470ms |
| 196 | `ab81b076…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 5 | 7/10 | 21289ms |
| 197 | `d7cfae6f…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 19652ms |
| 198 | `19403010…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 17471ms |
| 199 | `7ed932dd…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 26942ms |
| 200 | `105f8ad0…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 18412ms |
| 201 | `b57efde3…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 19816ms |
| 202 | `15d37511…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 18722ms |
| 203 | `bb863dd9…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 15677ms |
| 204 | `fe0d3941…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 21199ms |
| 205 | `6a900a40…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 19031ms |
| 206 | `9efbcd35…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 34467ms |
| 207 | `1d4672c8…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | Yes | 3 | 6/10 | 21475ms |
| 208 | `4de6a529…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 21891ms |
| 209 | `4c4dc603…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 26524ms |
| 210 | `bb499d9c…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 28833ms |
| 211 | `5349dd7b…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 22869ms |
| 212 | `a4a9195c…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 8/10 | 19003ms |
| 213 | `552b7dd0…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 26945ms |
| 214 | `11dcc268…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 4/10 | 18156ms |
| 215 | `76418a2c…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 18221ms |
| 216 | `0e386e32…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 20342ms |
| 217 | `7de33b48…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 22835ms |
| 218 | `854f3814…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 18467ms |
| 219 | `4122f866…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 6 | 4/10 | 25862ms |
| 220 | `2c249e0f…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 16120ms |

## QA Issues

### ❌ `83d10b06…` — score 4/10
- Entire population marked sampled, ignoring calculated sample size of 68.
- QoQ variance appears non-percentage and may not meet >20% criterion.
- Evidence of specific required metrics (A1, C1) is unclear.
  > 💡 Limit sampled rows to calculated sample size and clearly compute and apply percentage variance criteria.

### ✅ `7d7fc9a7…` — score 5/10
- Prepaid Insurance schedule appears to omit BCBS monthly invoices.
- Ending balances do not reconcile to provided April GL balances.
- Prepaid Expenses tab lacks required monthly summary totals at bottom.
  > 💡 Rebuild schedules to fully include BCBS, add monthly summaries, and reconcile exactly to GL balances.

### ✅ `43dc9778…` — score 5/10
- Form 1040 and schedules are summaries, not completed IRS-compliant forms.
- Multiple income, deduction, and withholding amounts are left unconfirmed placeholders.
- Deliverable relies on assumptions instead of fully using provided client documents.
  > 💡 Prepare a complete IRS-compliant 1040 PDF with all amounts finalized or clearly request missing documents first.

### ❌ `ee09d943…` — score 4/10
- CFO-reserved Tabs 1, 2, 2a, and 3 appear in the April workbook TOC.
- Multiple tabs and headers still reference 3-31-25 instead of April 2025.
- Several schedules appear carried forward without April data updates.
  > 💡 Remove CFO tabs and fully update all schedules, dates, and data to April before resubmission.

### ❌ `f84ea6ac…` — score 2/10
- Word document lacks the required summary table and study comparisons.
- Five post-2020 publicly available academic articles are not identified or summarized.
- Key findings and government implications sections are missing.
  > 💡 Create a one-page Word table summarizing five qualifying studies with required details and implications.

### ✅ `a328feea…` — score 9/10
- Procedure does not specify alternate contact if Supervisor or Team Lead is unavailable.
  > 💡 Add a clear backup contact process when the primary Supervisor or Team Lead cannot be reached.

### ✅ `27e8912c…` — score 7/10
- Action Items Word document lacks an actual table with required tracking columns.
- Resolution tracking fields, including resolver name, are missing or unclear.
- Ergonomic images lack public-domain source citations or attributions.
  > 💡 Add a complete action-items table with all required fields and cite public-domain image sources.

### ✅ `17111c03…` — score 8/10
- Cleanup schedule dates are in 2025 while memo is dated 2026.
- Memo does not explicitly reference how volunteers access the Excel schedule.
  > 💡 Align schedule dates with the memo year or clarify that the schedule is a sample or rolling template.

### ✅ `c44e9b62…` — score 6/10
- Unrequested organizational chart DOCX file was produced instead of only the required PDF.
- Regional 10% reduction is described but not clearly quantified in the FTE Excel report.
- Total branch-wide 4% reduction is not explicitly summarized or validated.
  > 💡 Remove the extra DOCX, quantify regional reductions in the Excel, and clearly state total FTE percentage reduced.

### ✅ `99ac6944…` — score 5/10
- Mixer lacks onboard compression and cannot create two truly independent IEM mixes.
- Retailer web links are placeholders and not actual URLs.
- PDF does not clearly include the required embedded PNG cost spreadsheet image.
  > 💡 Select a mixer with true analog compression and dual aux mixes, add real retailer links, and embed required images in the PDF.

### ✅ `f9a1c16c…` — score 6/10
- Vocalist monitor wedges are not listed in Outputs despite being required.
- Stage plot labels are garbled and overlapping, reducing professional clarity.
- Input/Output lists lack clear correspondence to all onstage monitor positions.
  > 💡 Add clearly labeled vocal wedges, clean up layout spacing, and align all outputs with visible monitors.

### ✅ `38889c3b…` — score 6/10
- No evidence confirms G major sections and Ab major bridge timing compliance.
- Duration and exact 140 BPM synchronization are not verified.
- Use of provided drum reference versus created Drums stem is unclear.
  > 💡 Include a brief technical sheet confirming keys, BPM, duration, and drum reference usage.

### ✅ `ff85ee58…` — score 6/10
- No evidence the sax was resynced using the provided MP3 reference.
- Timing edits to 1/8 notes within ±1/16 are not demonstrated.
- Loudness and true peak compliance are stated but not verified.
  > 💡 Include a brief technical report or analysis screenshots confirming sync, timing edits, and loudness compliance.

### ✅ `4b894ae3…` — score 8/10
- Bass level matched to raw bass, not explicitly to rough mix.
- Note repair description is vague about copying in-key notes.
- Includes unnecessary CONFIDENCE tag reducing professionalism.
  > 💡 Clarify rough-mix level matching, specify note replacement method, and remove extraneous tags.

### ✅ `1b1ade2d…` — score 8/10
- Minor typographical truncation observed in section heading.
- Digital platform functional requirements are high-level, not explicitly specified.
- Approval timelines and SLAs are not clearly quantified.
  > 💡 Add explicit system requirements, SLAs, and correct minor formatting issues to strengthen execution readiness.

### ✅ `93b336f3…` — score 8/10
- Five-year cumulative savings are not explicitly calculated or summarised.
- Cost analysis lacks a clear per-unit before-and-after comparison table.
- Risk section appears brief with limited mitigation detail.
  > 💡 Add a concise cost table and five-year savings summary with expanded risk mitigations.

### ✅ `15ddd28d…` — score 8/10
- Document lacks a quantified day-by-day transition timeline with buffers.
- No explicit inventory build or line-stoppage contingency plan.
- Negotiation outcomes are not tied to clear go/no-go decision gates.
  > 💡 Add a dated transition roadmap with inventory buffers and decision milestones to strengthen execution readiness.

### ✅ `24d1e93f…` — score 6/10
- No explicit assumptions list included as requested in the task.
- Summary sheet lacks clear supplier recommendation and supporting comments.
- Tooling amortization logic over first 100,000 sets is not clearly explained or validated.
  > 💡 Add an assumptions section and a clear recommendation narrative, and clarify tooling amortization methodology.

### ✅ `05389f78…` — score 5/10
- Report lacks required 2–3 page depth and detailed quantitative cost comparison in INR.
- Alternate supplier analysis is qualitative despite requirement to use provided quotation figures.
- Email content preview does not clearly confirm 30% tooling cost recovery details.
  > 💡 Revise the report to include full INR cost calculations and expand analysis to meet length requirements.

### ✅ `575f8679…` — score 8/10
- Analysis plan lacks specific statistical tests beyond descriptive pre-post comparisons.
- Appendix does not clearly show full instrument samples or direct citation links.
  > 💡 Add explicit analysis techniques and include complete instrument excerpts or links in the appendix.

### ✅ `a74ead3b…` — score 6/10
- Content not verified against manuals despite requirement to follow them closely.
- Response admits lack of access to required proprietary materials.
- No evidence provided confirming icebreaker and wrap-up slides exist.
  > 💡 Revise presentations after directly reviewing manuals and explicitly confirm required slide elements.

### ✅ `bbe0a93b…` — score 7/10
- English follow-up table column labels do not exactly match required wording.
- English follow-up table column order appears incorrect or unclear.
- Resource guide lacks a housing or shelter services category.
  > 💡 Correct the English follow-up table labels/order and add housing resources to the guide.

### ✅ `85d95ce5…` — score 6/10
- Report length appears significantly shorter than required 8–15 pages.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing completed work.
- Unclear whether all shorthand notes were fully incorporated.
  > 💡 Expand the report to meet page requirements and explicitly confirm inclusion of all source notes.

### ✅ `76d10872…` — score 8/10
- Biweekly withholding amount appears slightly inconsistent with total monthly support calculation.
  > 💡 Recalculate and verify the biweekly withholding amount to ensure financial accuracy.

### ✅ `36d567ba…` — score 6/10
- Topic 11 high-risk status is not visible or confirmed in the document.
- Topic 8 cites a subpart rather than a specific Uniform Guidance section.
- File preview truncation prevents verification of topics 9–10 completeness.
  > 💡 Verify all required topics are present and cite precise 2 CFR sections where requested.

### ✅ `7bbfcfe9…` — score 9/10
- SCRA-12d citation may be inaccurate for acceleration and penalty prohibition.
  > 💡 Verify statutory subsection citations align precisely with each test question’s subject matter.

### ✅ `2696757c…` — score 8/10
- An additional DOCX file was produced despite the requirement for a single PDF deliverable.
  > 💡 Limit future deliverables to only the explicitly requested file formats.

### ✅ `4c18ebae…` — score 7/10
- Transaction dates extend beyond stated account closure dates.
- Excel summary sheet and aggregation promised are not evident.
- References lack the promised formatted hyperlinks.
  > 💡 Validate timelines, add the summary aggregation sheet, and include hyperlinks in references.

### ✅ `cebf301e…` — score 8/10
- Six-week delivery plan lacks concrete milestones and resourcing detail.
- TOTP authentication flow lacks enrollment and recovery details.
- Future payments and contract signing lack security and compliance considerations.
  > 💡 Add a short execution plan with milestones, auth edge cases, and future compliance notes.

### ✅ `c2e8f271…` — score 8/10
- Text response is meta-focused and does not summarize document contents.
- Commit message guidelines appear truncated or incomplete in the preview.
  > 💡 Add concrete examples and expand monorepo-specific conventions for clearer guidance.

### ✅ `2ea2e5b5…` — score 8/10
- Original task did not explicitly request a PowerPoint deliverable.
- Use of source Excel data is asserted but not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Explicitly reference the Excel data and include a brief data methodology slide.

### ❌ `c357f0e2…` — score 4/10
- Test cases count far below required 80–100.
- Column headers are missing or incorrect per UAT template.
- Several modules and edge cases appear insufficiently covered.
  > 💡 Expand to 80–100 cases, fix headers to match template, and fully cover all modules and roles.

### ✅ `a45bc83b…` — score 6/10
- POC document lacks detailed step-by-step implementation instructions.
- Cloud Armor is inaccurately described as providing Layer 3 and Layer 4 DDoS protection.
- Architecture diagram content is overly minimal for enterprise review.
  > 💡 Expand the POC with explicit steps, correct DDoS descriptions, and enrich the architecture diagram detail.

### ❌ `a10ec48c…` — score 3/10
- Document lacks required tables with five specified columns and restaurant rows.
- No restaurant data sourced from DowntownSarasota.com or Google Maps.
- Missing links, hours, descriptions, directions, and categories for restaurants.
  > 💡 Populate tables with verified downtown restaurants and complete all required columns.

### ✅ `fccaa4a1…` — score 7/10
- PDF lacks visible icons and styled visual layout as requested.
- Statue of Liberty photo appears as a placeholder and may not be embedded in PDF.
- Age requirement listed conflicts with included 16-year-old participant.
  > 💡 Add proper icons, embed a royalty-free image, and correct age requirements for consistency.

### ✅ `f5d428fd…` — score 6/10
- PDF is four pages, not the requested two pages.
- Several destination descriptions are fewer than three sentences.
- Image sources and research references are not cited or verified as royalty-free.
  > 💡 Condense to two pages, expand each destination to four sentences, and clearly cite royalty-free image sources.

### ✅ `2fa8e956…` — score 6/10
- Footer titled Napa Valley Wineries with specified Georgia formatting is not evident.
- Grape varieties are not displayed in purple Georgia 9 pt text.
- No sources or citations for wineries, distances, or drive times are included.
  > 💡 Add the formatted footer, apply purple styling to grape varieties, and include cited sources and map references.

### ✅ `0e4fe8cd…` — score 6/10
- Incorrect Istanbul airport code used; IST should replace ISL.
- High-value connections are generic and lack verified named individuals.
- Return-day logistics and flight details appear incomplete or unclear.
  > 💡 Verify aviation details, strengthen elite networking entries, and fully specify the return journey door-to-door.

### ✅ `b7a5912e…` — score 6/10
- Booking source revenue does not reconcile with total daily revenue.
- Payment method revenue totals equal only half of reported total revenue.
- Text response does not confirm analysis of the provided reference spreadsheet.
  > 💡 Reconcile revenue totals across summaries and explicitly confirm calculations are based on the provided spreadsheet.

### ❌ `aa071045…` — score 4/10
- Service Request Form lacks required details beyond the title.
- Total damage revenue does not match breakdown sums.
- Service form does not explicitly document mirror damage and $200 charge.
  > 💡 Populate the service form fully and correct revenue calculations to ensure internal consistency.

### ✅ `476db143…` — score 8/10
- Resident email is generic and not personalized by unit or inspection date.
- Email PDF does not confirm alternate dates for residents who already requested changes.
  > 💡 Personalize the email per resident and include confirmed alternate inspection dates where applicable.

### ✅ `61f546a8…` — score 9/10
- Vendor section does not explicitly state when no appliance orders are required.
  > 💡 Add an explicit 'no appliances required' note for vendors without appliance orders.

### ✅ `f3351922…` — score 8/10
- Client name placeholder not replaced.
- Email signature is incomplete.
- Paragraph formatting is minimal for a comprehensive email.
  > 💡 Personalize the greeting, complete the signature, and improve formatting for readability.

### ✅ `61717508…` — score 7/10
- Training deck PDF does not appear to be approximately 10 pages.
- Evidence of Senior Safe Act and FINRA Rule 2165 coverage is not clearly verified.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing completed content.
  > 💡 Confirm training PDF length and explicitly reference Senior Safe Act and Rule 2165 sections.

### ✅ `0ed38524…` — score 6/10
- Duplicate categories appear within districts, such as repeated General entries.
- Grammar errors exist, including incorrect pluralization like '1 comments'.
- Talking points document contains truncated or incomplete sentences.
  > 💡 Clean categories, correct grammar, and complete all truncated talking points before final submission.

### ✅ `d025a41c…` — score 7/10
- Final alternative statement appears truncated in the document.
- Bold formatting for case titles is not clearly verifiable.
- Reliance on generic scenarios without explicit reference to provided case logs.
  > 💡 Review the document for truncation, verify formatting, and ensure alignment with actual case logs.

### ✅ `401a07f1…` — score 7/10
- No explicit hyperlinks to referenced news stories are included.
- Word count appears below the required 500 words.
- Text response overstates completeness before verification.
  > 💡 Add explicit hyperlinks, confirm 500-word length, and align claims with the actual document content.

### ✅ `afe56d05…` — score 6/10
- Document appears significantly shorter than the required 2,200–2,300 words.
- Explicit hyperlinks and accredited references are not clearly included.
- Several sections rely on general guidance without detailed dos and don’ts.
  > 💡 Expand content to meet length, add cited hyperlinks, and clearly format dos and don’ts in each section.

### ✅ `9a8c8e28…` — score 7/10
- Framework guide preview does not clearly show a bibliography with links.
- Slack training channel and contact instructions are not visible in all documents.
- Quiz is very short and may insufficiently assess understanding.
  > 💡 Expand the guide and quiz, explicitly adding bibliography links and training contact details throughout.

### ✅ `3a4c347c…` — score 6/10
- KPIs section is missing from the document.
- Draft four-week schedule appears incomplete or truncated.
- Reference boilerplate is not explicitly incorporated or reflected.
  > 💡 Add a complete KPIs section, finish the full four-week schedule, and align content with the boilerplate.

### ❌ `ec2fccc9…` — score 4/10
- Article appears far under 1,500-word requirement.
- Secondary SEO keywords list is missing.
- Headers, links, and artist references are incomplete or inconsistent.
  > 💡 Expand content to full length, add structured headers, links, artist highlights, and list chosen secondary keywords.

### ✅ `8c8fc328…` — score 8/10
- Provided voiceover script content is not explicitly incorporated or referenced.
- Child-specific language cues are implied but not clearly articulated.
  > 💡 Integrate brief voiceover excerpts and add explicit kid-friendly phrasing notes.

### ✅ `e222075d…` — score 5/10
- No 30-second H.264 MP4 export was delivered as explicitly required.
- Scratch voiceover lacks spoken narration of the provided script.
- Stock footage links appear to be placeholders, not real preview URLs.
  > 💡 Provide a true 30-second MP4 with spoken scratch VO and real stock preview links for review.

### ❌ `c94452e4…` — score 4/10
- Uses placeholder footage instead of actual royalty-free stock clips.
- Supers from provided Photoshop file were not used.
- Music track inclusion and audio presence are unverified.
  > 💡 Replace placeholders with real stock, apply PSD supers, and include a verified 15-second music track.

### ❌ `75401f7c…` — score 4/10
- Final MP4 video was not delivered as required.
- Task requested editing work, not planning documents.
- Showreel audio and pacing were not actually executed.
  > 💡 Deliver the fully edited 01:20 MP4 showreel meeting all technical and creative specifications.

### ❌ `a941b6d8…` — score 3/10
- No final composited video file was created as explicitly required.
- Core tasks like stabilization, masking, tracking, and compositing were not executed.
- Deliverables substitute planning documents for the requested finished VFX shot.
  > 💡 Produce the actual composited video matching the base clip specs and required teleportation effects.

### ❌ `8079e27d…` — score 3/10
- Excel contains no actual S&P 500 company or valuation data.
- Did not leverage publicly available data as explicitly required.
- Missing analysis to compare multiples versus historical index averages.
  > 💡 Populate the workbook with real S&P 500 company-level data sourced from public market references.

### ✅ `e21cd746…` — score 8/10
- Private company valuations are indicative without cited sources or valuation dates.
- Some listed customers and logistics scope are described at a high level.
  > 💡 Add data sources, valuation dates, and brief rationale for each private valuation estimate.

### ✅ `9e8607e7…` — score 8/10
- Slide count is 23, slightly below the requested ~30-slide target.
  > 💡 Consider adding a few summary or case-study slides to reach the target length.

### ✅ `c7d83f01…` — score 6/10
- Finite-difference method outputs zero prices, indicating a clear implementation error.
- Notebook file size suggests insufficient code depth and documentation.
- Analysis of numerical stability and accuracy metrics is limited.
  > 💡 Fix finite-difference implementation and expand the notebook with detailed methods, validation, and diagnostics.

### ✅ `46b34f78…` — score 7/10
- Specific issuer names and bond identifiers are not disclosed.
- Public data sources and referenced datasets are not explicitly cited.
- Trading and sales actions lack quantified trade examples.
  > 💡 Add named issuers, cite specific public data sources, and include concrete trade recommendations.

### ✅ `a1963a68…` — score 7/10
- Lacks explicit citations to publicly available Korean transportation data sources.
- Future-proofing and sustainability initiatives are not clearly evidenced in preview.
- Competitive analysis depth versus dominant incumbent appears limited.
  > 💡 Add explicit data citations and strengthen future-proofing and competitive differentiation sections.

### ❌ `5f6c57dd…` — score 3/10
- Workbook contains only headers with no calculations, data, or formulas.
- No evidence of dropdown functionality or linkage to raw financial data.
- Required metrics, rankings, and variances are not actually computed.
  > 💡 Populate all worksheets with formulas, data connections, and functional branch-selection dropdowns using the provided raw data.

### ❌ `b39a5aa7…` — score 3/10
- Summary and calculations tabs lack populated values and formulas.
- Quarterly projections and year-over-year growth are not shown.
- Inputs do not drive visible ad hoc scenario results.
  > 💡 Populate all tabs with formulas, quarterly outputs, and Y/Y growth driven by editable inputs.

### ✅ `b78fd844…` — score 8/10
- One sentence in the PDF is visibly truncated mid-word.
- Capital allocation details for pursuing both projects are not visible in preview.
  > 💡 Proofread the final PDF and clearly summarize the dual-project capital allocation.

### ❌ `4520f882…` — score 3/10
- Workbook contains mostly empty placeholder sheets without implemented payroll formulas.
- CBA rules, validations, and conflict highlighting are not actually implemented.
- Payroll categories and totals by musician are incomplete and not CBA-specific.
  > 💡 Implement full CBA-based formulas, validations, and populated examples to demonstrate functional payroll calculations.

### ✅ `ec591973…` — score 7/10
- Slide content cannot be verified from provided preview.
  > 💡 Include a brief slide content summary or image preview for verification.

### ✅ `62f04c2f…` — score 7/10
- Excel form lacks freight prepayment and restocking fee note.
- Excel form missing signature and date spaces for sales rep, GM, and Sales Manager.
- Word document omits program benefits regarding efficiency, sales growth, and removing dated merchandise.
  > 💡 Add missing Excel form sections and include a brief benefits paragraph in the Word overview.

### ❌ `3f821c2d…` — score 3/10
- Omni-level flow table is missing entirely.
- EOM Inventory and Turn calculations are blank or missing formulas.
- BOM inventory ignores provided July EOM by channel.
  > 💡 Complete channel and omni flows with correct BOMs, formulas, and validated ending inventory constraints.

### ❌ `e996036e…` — score 3/10
- Wholesale revenue calculations do not align with stated retailer margins and shipment value.
- Marketing allowance exceeds the stated 4% cap in some scenarios.
- Required cash flow timing analysis and visual chart are missing.
  > 💡 Recalculate financials correctly, add cash flow timing and a chart, and enforce the marketing allowance cap.

### ❌ `327fbc21…` — score 4/10
- Topside May plan misses required -15% LY target, showing significant positive growth.
- STD trend calculation and columns are missing from the worksheet.
- Worksheet headers contain blank columns and lack professional formatting.
  > 💡 Rework the plan to meet the -15% LY target and clearly add STD trend calculations and clean headers.

### ✅ `6dcae3f5…` — score 6/10
- Missing required analysis identifying PGY when residents met ACGME key indicator thresholds.
- Benchmarks only calculated for PGY-5, not for each PGY level as required.
- Excel lacks yearly interval averages and standard deviations per PGY stage.
  > 💡 Expand the Excel analysis to include per-PGY benchmarks and ACGME requirement attainment tracking.

### ✅ `1aecc095…` — score 6/10
- Telehealth Roadmap lacks actual Visio-style visual workflow content.
- Roadmap does not show decision points or handoff steps.
- Use of reference materials is not explicitly demonstrated.
  > 💡 Add a true one-page visual flow with steps, decision diamonds, and provider handoff details.

### ❌ `0353ee0c…` — score 3/10
- Document contains placeholder text instead of consolidated VA eligibility information.
- Presumptive conditions, locations, and dates are not exhaustively listed.
- Output contradicts requirement to compile information from provided links.
  > 💡 Populate all sections with complete data extracted from the referenced VA links before delivery.

### ✅ `40a8c4b1…` — score 5/10
- Unused optional topics were not highlighted in yellow in Topics & Labs sheet.
- Holiday exclusions were not verified or documented in the schedule.
- In-Service Study Session placement in February is not clearly identifiable.
  > 💡 Verify required constraints, highlight unused optional topics, and clearly label critical sessions and holidays.

### ❌ `4d1a8410…` — score 3/10
- Schedule document lacks required table with rooms, timings, breaks, lunch, and applicant assignments.
- Personal itineraries omit times, tours, lunch, breaks, and individual sequencing.
- Special constraints for Dr. Jones and Dr. Garrett are not scheduled.
  > 💡 Rebuild documents with detailed tables and complete time-based schedules meeting all specified constraints.

### ✅ `8c823e32…` — score 6/10
- Operational Guidance section appears truncated with incomplete sentences.
- Training, supervision, and accountability sections are not clearly present.
- Policy lacks detailed privacy, data retention, and audit requirements.
  > 💡 Complete truncated text and add explicit training, oversight, and privacy compliance sections.

### ✅ `eb54f575…` — score 9/10
- Minor wording implies all authorized officers receive issued rifles despite personal rifle carriers.
- Preview shows a truncated word suggesting a minor formatting or proofreading issue.
  > 💡 Perform a final proofreading pass to correct minor wording and formatting inconsistencies.

### ✅ `11e1b169…` — score 8/10
- KRS 503.090 section lacks specific statutory elements and definitions.
- Guide omits brief practical examples or field scenarios.
  > 💡 Add concise statutory language excerpts and one-line field examples for each legal concept.

### ✅ `a95a5829…` — score 8/10
- Effective date and policy number contain blank placeholders.
- Signature blocks for required approving authorities are not included.
- Review and approval timeline durations are not fully defined.
  > 💡 Add completed administrative fields, signature sections, and explicit approval timelines to finalize the policy.

### ✅ `22c0809b…` — score 7/10
- PDF exceeds required 2–4 page length.
- Page count requirement explicitly specified but not met.
  > 💡 Condense formatting or combine sections to reduce the PDF to four pages or fewer.

### ✅ `bf68f2ad…` — score 6/10
- Cumulative backlog/buffer sign convention is inconsistent with column definition.
- Spreadsheet reduces directly to four-day weeks without a five-day transition.
- Demand values appear unrealistically low relative to stated 438.81-hour backlog.
  > 💡 Clarify backlog sign logic, include a five-day transition, and validate demand data against the source file.

### ✅ `efca245f…` — score 5/10
- Excel sheets lack open PO quantities and cumulative backlog tracking.
- Production rates ignore stated 135 sets/day upgrade starting February 5.
- Expanded capacity scenario violates no-overtime constraint with 10-hour shift.
  > 💡 Revise spreadsheets to reflect PO volumes, cumulative balances, correct capacities, and stated labor constraints.

### ✅ `9e39df84…` — score 6/10
- Average Output and Total Output columns contain no formulas or calculated values.
- Operator Output Data only includes Week 1, not Weeks 1 through 48.
- Dashboard lacks visible PivotTables, charts, and week selection controls.
  > 💡 Complete calculations, extend data structure for all weeks, and add required pivots, charts, and controls.

### ✅ `68d8d901…` — score 6/10
- Production assignments do not individually list all 20 personnel as requested.
- Production sequences lack complete end-to-end sub-steps and appear truncated.
- Work schedule does not demonstrate calculations proving 250,000 lb target achievement.
  > 💡 Expand personnel listings, complete all process steps, and add throughput calculations validating the production goal.

### ✅ `1752cb53…` — score 7/10
- Daily and weekly labor hour limits per press are not explicitly validated.
- Minimum three changeovers per press are not clearly demonstrated.
- Extra unnamed columns appear in the worksheet header.
  > 💡 Add summary checks to explicitly show compliance with labor limits and changeover requirements.

### ✅ `bd72994f…` — score 6/10
- No specific luxury brand or collection is identified.
- Looks are not sourced from an official 2025 resort lookbook.
- Slides lack imagery or visual styling elements expected in luxury presentations.
  > 💡 Select a named luxury brand and base looks on its official 2025 resort collection with visuals.

### ✅ `211d0093…` — score 6/10
- Closing Duties section lacks any task entries.
- Extra DOCX file included despite PDF-only requirement.
- Some tasks appear duplicated or misaligned between duty sections.
  > 💡 Remove the DOCX file and complete the Closing Duties task table clearly.

### ✅ `cecac8f9…` — score 6/10
- Uses USD currency instead of GBP for a UK-based store.
- Promotional offers lack specific details from referenced marketing materials.
- Performance targets are stated but not explicitly tied to provided reference documents.
  > 💡 Align currency, explicitly reference provided materials, and detail exact promotional mechanics.

### ✅ `8f9e8bcd…` — score 8/10
- Section title should read 'Core Strategies for Overcoming the Objection'.
- Suggested responses could more clearly include a confident close or next step.
  > 💡 Add a brief closing question to each practice response to reinforce asking for the sale.

### ✅ `0fad6023…` — score 7/10
- No true visual representation of pan widths beyond numeric rows.
- POG Builder column headers are partially blank and unclear.
- No visible warning or formatting indicating overfilled FSC.
  > 💡 Add visual pan blocks, clear headers, and conditional warnings to improve usability.

### ✅ `02314fc6…` — score 8/10
- Checklist lacks explicit scoring percentage or pass/fail rating summary.
- GM and LP signature or acknowledgment fields are not included.
- Some sections could use clearer item numbering for audit tracking.
  > 💡 Add a scoring summary and signature fields to strengthen accountability and review clarity.

### ✅ `4d61a19a…` — score 6/10
- Excel template lacks a store sign-off field.
- Template structure is too minimal and not scalable for multiple promotions or stores.
- Regional versus store-editable fields are not clearly protected or designated.
  > 💡 Expand the Excel template with protected regional fields, store sign-off, and scalable layout, then update training deck accordingly.

### ✅ `6436ff9e…` — score 8/10
- Section 5 contains a visible truncated word indicating a typo.
- Later sections are truncated in the preview, making completeness unclear.
  > 💡 Proofread the full document and confirm all sections display completely and error-free.

### ✅ `8a7b6fca…` — score 8/10
- Process map lacks detailed annotations for manual handling steps.
- Failure-handling criteria and triggers are not explicitly defined.
  > 💡 Add brief annotations defining decision criteria and manual handling standards for clarity.

### ✅ `40a99a31…` — score 6/10
- Specific make and model selections are not documented in the report text.
- Justification for chosen LIDAR units and camera quantities is insufficiently detailed.
- Excel hardware table content appears truncated and may omit required specifications.
  > 💡 Add explicit make/model selections with justification and ensure the Excel table fully lists all required hardware.

### ✅ `b9665ca1…` — score 5/10
- PDF is two pages instead of required single-page schematic.
- Drawing software used is not Visio, Electra, or AutoCAD Electrical.
- Text describes intent but does not prove all specified wiring requirements are met.
  > 💡 Regenerate a single-page PDF using approved software and verify all specified safety wiring details.

### ✅ `c6269101…` — score 6/10
- Text response provides no actual findings or conclusions.
- Statistical capability and stability analyses are not evidenced.
- Use of the provided Excel data is not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Summarize key results and explicitly reference analyses performed using the provided dataset.

### ✅ `be830ca0…` — score 7/10
- No 1-sample hypothesis test chart file is provided.
- PowerPoint content cannot be verified against required sections.
- ANOVA interpretation and conclusions are not documented in text.
  > 💡 Add the missing hypothesis test chart and briefly summarize key statistical conclusions in the deliverable.

### ✅ `cd9efc18…` — score 8/10
- Self-proving affidavit language and notary acknowledgment are not clearly identified.
- Survivorship period definition is not explicitly stated.
- Guardian and trustee acceptance language is not clearly referenced.
  > 💡 Explicitly label and verify execution, survivorship, and fiduciary acceptance clauses for clarity and completeness.

### ✅ `a97369c7…` — score 8/10
- Some case citations are incomplete or lack full procedural context.
- Statutory and legislative references are not consistently hyperlinked.
- Minor formatting and typographical truncations appear in places.
  > 💡 Polish citations, add hyperlinks, and proofread formatting before final distribution.

### ✅ `3f625cb2…` — score 9/10
- Limited explanation of COPPA’s lack of a private right of action.
  > 💡 Briefly clarify which claims can be brought directly versus through regulators.

### ✅ `aad21e4c…` — score 6/10
- Capitalization schedule before and after issuance is not evidenced in the document preview.
- Minority-investor consent rights over extraordinary actions are not clearly included.
- Anti-dilution provision carve-outs for exempt issuances are unclear or incomplete.
  > 💡 Add an explicit capitalization schedule and clearly enumerate consent rights and anti-dilution carve-outs.

### ✅ `8314d1b1…` — score 8/10
- Text response summarizes intent rather than substantive analysis.
- Memo date is future-dated March 2026.
- DGCL Section 144 amendments discussion appears high-level.
  > 💡 Provide a brief substantive summary in the text response and add more detailed statutory analysis.

### ❌ `5e2b6aab…` — score 4/10
- STEP files appear to be placeholder-sized and likely contain no real geometry.
- Assembly PDF lacks visible exploded and assembled views with balloons.
- DOCX drawings were provided though not requested in the task.
  > 💡 Provide valid non-placeholder STEP geometry and a proper ANSI B assembly PDF with views and balloons.

### ✅ `46fc494e…` — score 6/10
- No numerical node temperatures reported at required time points.
- Back-face temperature margin relative to 150 C is not quantified.
- Summary table of maximum back-face temperatures is missing.
  > 💡 Include explicit temperature values and a clear margin table to support the pass/fail assessment.

### ❌ `3940b7e7…` — score 3/10
- Numerical CFD results and performance metrics are missing from the report.
- Required tables are present only as placeholders without data.
- Boundary conditions and material properties lack specific values.
  > 💡 Populate the report with actual CFD data, completed tables, and quantified boundary and material parameters.

### ✅ `8077e700…` — score 6/10
- AISI 1045 analysis is incomplete due to missing hardness data.
- Results section lacks explicit tables and quantitative values.
- Time-to-peak hardness discussion is limited to AISI 1018 only.
  > 💡 Include inferred AISI 1045 trends using domain knowledge and add explicit data tables.

### ✅ `5a2d70da…` — score 6/10
- Master Tool List lacks required subtotal and Suffolk County post-tax grand total.
- Manufacturing steps omit explicit machine identification from Integration Proposal.
- Tool list lacks clear budget summary confirming compliance with $7,500 limit.
  > 💡 Add tax calculations, budget summary, and machine identification to fully meet all task requirements.

### ✅ `74d6e8b0…` — score 7/10
- References section appears truncated and incomplete.
- Specific dosing recommendations and regimens are insufficiently detailed.
- Limited international guideline comparison beyond general statements.
  > 💡 Expand references, add detailed dosing tables, and explicitly compare major international society guidelines.

### ✅ `81db15ff…` — score 6/10
- NP chart-signature requirements appear inaccurate for Pennsylvania.
- PA chart-signature requirements may be overstated in Washington.
- Several regulatory details lack citations or validation dates.
  > 💡 Verify each state’s current NP and PA statutes and update the spreadsheet accordingly.

### ✅ `61b0946a…` — score 5/10
- Output invents requirements and files not requested in the original task.
- References a Cadaver Budget.xlsx that was never provided.
- Key operational constraints like timing windows and scheduling are not addressed.
  > 💡 Align deliverables strictly to the stated task and base analyses only on provided information.

### ❌ `61e7b9c6…` — score 2/10
- Spreadsheet largely empty with many blank rows and an unused empty sheet.
- Bijuva generic incorrectly listed as estradiol/bazedoxifene instead of estradiol/progesterone.
- Formulary lacks most FDA-approved and common off-label menopause medications with prices.
  > 💡 Complete the spreadsheet with accurate drug data, correct generics, full formulary coverage, and realistic monthly prices.

### ✅ `c9bf9801…` — score 6/10
- Program timeline section is truncated and contains a heading typo.
- Appendix listing documents and templates is missing or insufficiently detailed.
- 4-month and 8-month evaluation form documents were not produced or linked.
  > 💡 Complete the timeline, fix typos, add a clear appendix, and include the missing evaluation form files.

### ❌ `f1be6436…` — score 4/10
- Uses placeholder screenshots instead of real sourced screenshots.
- Flight, transportation, and hotel details lack required itemization and dates.
- Cost allocation shows incorrect negative remaining balances.
  > 💡 Replace placeholders with real screenshots, itemize all logistics with dates, and correct cost calculations.

### ✅ `41f6ef59…` — score 8/10
- Spreadsheet lacks visible dropdown menus or checkboxes for efficient data entry.
  > 💡 Add data validation dropdowns and checkboxes to status columns to improve usability.

### ❌ `6d2c8e55…` — score 4/10
- Journal Club Schedule.xlsx lacks clear journal club bookings with dates, times, and rooms.
- Schedule does not show 6–8pm entries or explicit October–December sessions.
- Excel file does not demonstrate holiday or weekday preference validation.
  > 💡 Explicitly add dated 6–8pm journal club bookings per month with room names and notes.

### ✅ `4b98ccce…` — score 7/10
- HIPAA clause appears incomplete or truncated in correspondence letters.
- Letters do not clearly reference provided Clauses Sheet and Letter Template Sheet.
- Excel sheets contain blank rows before signed section.
  > 💡 Complete HIPAA language per Clauses Sheet and remove unnecessary blank rows for professionalism.

### ✅ `60221cd0…` — score 6/10
- Early voting start date is incorrect; 45 days before November 4 is not August 22.
- An extra DOCX file was produced despite requesting only a PDF deliverable.
  > 💡 Correct the early voting date and deliver only the finalized PDF file.

### ✅ `ef8719da…` — score 6/10
- Text response is meta and does not summarize the pitch content.
- Explicit hyperlinks section is not clearly presented in the document.
- One sentence appears truncated in the preview, suggesting possible formatting error.
  > 💡 Ensure the pitch clearly includes a hyperlinks section and fix any truncation issues.

### ✅ `3baa0009…` — score 6/10
- Article describes slowing growth, not explicitly negative global growth as requested.
- DOCX preview indicates only two paragraphs, below typical 300–500 word structure.
- Chart data values cannot be verified against World Bank figures from the report.
  > 💡 Clarify whether the forecast implies contraction and ensure document length and chart data precisely match requirements.

### ✅ `5d0feb24…` — score 7/10
- Includes unprofessional CONFIDENCE tag in text response.
- Claims novelty as 'first time' studying non-sunlike stars may be inaccurate.
- Science edit links to the specific arXiv paper are not clearly evident.
  > 💡 Remove confidence tag, verify novelty claims, and explicitly cite the arXiv paper and sources.

### ✅ `1a78e076…` — score 6/10
- Document length likely does not meet 10–15 page requirement.
- Coverage of prevalence, age stratification, and financial impact is not clearly demonstrated.
- Reference count and adherence to maximum 30 sources are unclear.
  > 💡 Verify page length, explicitly address all required data elements, and confirm reference limits.

### ✅ `1b9ec237…` — score 7/10
- Unable to verify slide count and required elements without PPT preview.
- Pre-test question and case study content not explicitly confirmed.
- Reference formatting and AHA guideline accuracy not verifiable.
  > 💡 Provide a brief slide-by-slide outline or exported PDF for verification.

### ✅ `0112fc9b…` — score 6/10
- Plan section appears truncated with an incomplete medication instruction.
- Driving restriction counseling after suspected concussion is not documented.
  > 💡 Ensure the SOAP note is complete, with full plan details and explicit safety counseling.

### ✅ `772e7524…` — score 8/10
- Family and social history details are incomplete or omitted.
- Immunization status and surgical history are not documented.
- Review of systems is not explicitly organized or comprehensive.
  > 💡 Include complete ROS, family, social, immunization, and surgical histories for full SOAP completeness.

### ✅ `e6429658…` — score 6/10
- Appeal letter likely under 2 pages, not meeting stated length requirement.
- AbbVie assistance application is not the actual completed official form.
- Appeal letter contains a patient name truncation error.
  > 💡 Expand the appeal to full 2–4 pages and complete the official AbbVie application form accurately.

### ✅ `b5d2e6f1…` — score 6/10
- Data tab contains raw data instead of a pivot table.
- Grand totals are missing on Sales by Brand and Sales by Store tabs.
- Sales by Store tab content is not clearly validated in the output.
  > 💡 Convert Data into a pivot table and add verified grand totals to both summary tabs.

### ✅ `47ef842d…` — score 7/10
- Text response describes intent instead of summarizing completed analysis.
- Show-your-work explanation is not explicitly described in the narrative.
- Graph is provided but not embedded or referenced within the Excel file.
  > 💡 Summarize key findings and calculations directly in the text and reference where they appear in Excel.

### ✅ `1137e2bb…` — score 8/10
- SKU summary tab is not fully aggregated at SKU level.
- Summary relies on PO-level rows rather than SKU totals.
- Floating-point price precision appears unrounded in Excel.
  > 💡 Add a pivot table aggregating total errors by SKU with PO drill-down enabled.

### ✅ `c3525d4d…` — score 6/10
- Removed stores are not identified or reported.
- Final store list incorrectly marks all locations as new.
- Production units include decimals instead of whole numbers.
  > 💡 Add explicit added/removed store comparison and correct store status and unit rounding.

### ✅ `9a0d8d36…` — score 6/10
- PPT content cannot be verified due to unsupported preview.
- Step-by-step calculations with hypothetical data are not confirmed.
- Net proceeds comparison clarity cannot be validated.
  > 💡 Provide slide screenshots or detailed outline to verify calculations and tax treatments.

### ✅ `664a42e5…` — score 6/10
- Slide content cannot be verified because no preview of actual presentation content is provided.
- Specific 2025 gift tax exclusion amount is not explicitly confirmed.
- Side-by-side ILIT versus no-ILIT comparison is not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Include a brief slide-by-slide summary or screenshots to verify all required elements are covered.

### ✅ `feb5eefc…` — score 8/10
- Page count compliance with the 12-page limit is not explicitly confirmed.
- Text response summarizes intent rather than substantive analysis.
- DOCX file was produced in addition to the requested PDF.
  > 💡 Explicitly confirm PDF page count and briefly summarize the final recommendation in the text response.

### ✅ `3600de06…` — score 6/10
- Slide content cannot be verified due to lack of preview or outline.
- Explicit FINRA and NAIC citations within slides are unconfirmed.
- Ten-slide structure and required comparison sections are not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Provide a slide-by-slide outline with citations or include readable slide previews.

### ✅ `c657103b…` — score 6/10
- Excel lacks tax calculation on Roth conversion amounts.
- Spreadsheet does not explicitly show cumulative tax savings.
- PowerPoint template usage cannot be verified from content.
  > 💡 Add conversion tax calculations, cumulative tax savings, and confirm template alignment in slides.

### ✅ `ae0c1093…` — score 8/10
- Text response emphasizes DOCX creation despite PDFs being the primary required deliverable.
  > 💡 Align the narrative strictly with the PDF-only requirement to avoid confusion.

### ✅ `f9f82549…` — score 6/10
- PDF is not a visual flowchart, only a numbered text list.
- Flowchart lacks decision points and directional logic expected in procedures.
- PPT content cannot be verified to include detailed incident examples per header.
  > 💡 Convert the procedure into a true visual flowchart and ensure each header has detailed incident slides.

### ✅ `57b2cdf2…` — score 8/10
- Surveillance start time conflicts: narrative says 7:30 p.m., timeline shows 7:25 p.m.
- Surveillance concluded at 1:20 a.m., exceeding the requested 1:00 a.m. end time.
- PDF contains a grammar error: 'earlier than request' is incomplete.
  > 💡 Align stated times precisely and correct minor grammatical errors before final client submission.

### ✅ `84322284…` — score 8/10
- Client name inconsistent between task and report.
- Timeline lacks full day-by-day breakdown for the entire week.
- Some observations are summarized broadly rather than time-stamped.
  > 💡 Standardize client naming and expand the timeline with daily, time-specific entries.

### ✅ `6241e678…` — score 6/10
- PDF date headers contain corrupted labels like "3A1ug" and "0A1ug".
- Schedule includes unrequested tasks like casting, crew, and locations.
- Color-coding and client-task distinctions are not verifiable from provided preview.
  > 💡 Fix date header errors and confirm required color-coding and task scope align exactly with the brief.

### ✅ `e14e32ba…` — score 6/10
- Locations and business hours are missing for all listed restaurants.
- Image fields link to websites, not actual photos.
- One interview link is truncated with placeholder content.
  > 💡 Add addresses, business hours, real photo links, and fix incomplete media links.

### ❌ `e4f664ea…` — score 4/10
- Script length is only two pages, far below the required 8–12 pages.
- Several action lines tell internal emotion instead of purely showing observable behavior.
- Text response claims full delivery without acknowledging reduced scope and length.
  > 💡 Expand the screenplay to full required length while strictly maintaining show-don’t-tell action.

### ❌ `a079d38f…` — score 3/10
- Excel lacks detailed cost line items and service rates.
- No time estimates per role, day, or project total.
- Column structure is incomplete with mostly empty columns.
  > 💡 Add proper columns and populate line-item costs, hours, rates, and totals per role and day.

### ❌ `02aa1805…` — score 3/10
- No Illinois EPA data was extracted or reviewed.
- Excel workbook contains no well records or analysis.
- No viable wells were identified or highlighted as requested.
  > 💡 Access IEPA factsheets, populate well data, and provide data-driven recommendations.

### ✅ `fd6129bd…` — score 8/10
- SOP lacks visible version control, effective date, and approval signature section.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing delivered content.
  > 💡 Add standard SOP metadata and approvals page to strengthen audit readiness.

### ✅ `ce864f41…` — score 6/10
- Missing written responses to the three CEO questions.
- No department-level utilization analysis or summary tab is present.
- No project budget comparison using MarchBudget.xlsx is included.
  > 💡 Add summary, department utilization, and project budget comparison tabs with explicit answers.

### ✅ `58ac1cc5…` — score 6/10
- Change Control Request appears incomplete with truncated risk assessment content.
- No explicit review or summary of actual vendor COA data is documented.
- Change Control form fields lack sufficient detail on affected workflows.
  > 💡 Complete the change control risk section and explicitly summarize COA versus RMS data.

### ✅ `3c19c6d1…` — score 6/10
- Text response references Word and Excel files not provided in the task.
- Inclusion of CONFIDENCE tag is unprofessional and not requested.
- Slide 4 tabular progress summary compliance cannot be verified from description.
  > 💡 Remove extraneous tags, avoid referencing nonexistent sources, and explicitly confirm required slide content.

### ✅ `a99d85fc…` — score 7/10
- Annual and monthly matrices are not clearly separated by three distinct scenarios.
- Notes section below the Annual Rent Matrix is missing or unclear.
- Color-coding and editable light-blue variable cells are not evident.
  > 💡 Add clearly separated, color-coded matrices per scenario with a visible Notes section and highlighted editable cells.

### ✅ `55ddb773…` — score 6/10
- Violation list appears incomplete or truncated compared to attached reference requirements.
- Numerous formatting errors and stray characters reduce professional quality.
- Architectural items are not consistently listed on individual clear lines.
  > 💡 Revise the form to fully match the reference PDF and clean all formatting and typographical issues.

### ❌ `1e5a1d7f…` — score 3/10
- The .docx file lacks the required four-column task table.
- No actual schedule content or tasks are included.
- PM duties reference is not reflected in the document.
  > 💡 Add a complete table with detailed weekly tasks derived from the PM duties.

### ✅ `0419f1c3…` — score 8/10
- Acknowledgement time performance lacks quantified metrics from the work order data.
- Training recommendations could more explicitly map each module to specific documented gaps.
  > 💡 Add explicit acknowledgment-time statistics and a brief training-to-gap justification table.

### ✅ `ed2bc14c…` — score 9/10
- Exit survey categorization into five reasons is not explicitly described.
  > 💡 Briefly note how exit survey responses were categorized into the five predefined reasons.

### ✅ `46bc7238…` — score 8/10
- Free stock photo sourcing is not explicitly identified or credited.
- One-page flyer is described but not visually designed as a standalone page.
- Email script lacks a clear call-to-action and signature.
  > 💡 Add explicit free stock photo credits and enhance scripts and flyer with stronger execution details.

### ✅ `2d06bc0a…` — score 9/10
- Extension deposit applicability or refundability is not specified.
  > 💡 Clarify whether the $20,000 extension deposit is refundable or applied to the purchase price.

### ✅ `fd3ad420…` — score 8/10
- Text response summarizes intent instead of detailing document contents.
  > 💡 Include a brief content summary or excerpt in the text response.

### ✅ `0818571f…` — score 6/10
- Listings are indicative examples, not verified active Crexi or LoopNet listings.
- Investor criteria from attached PDF is not explicitly referenced or matched.
- Some property details appear incomplete or truncated.
  > 💡 Source verified active listings and clearly map each property to the investor’s stated criteria.

### ❌ `6074bba3…` — score 3/10
- Numerous placeholders remain unfilled throughout the CMA document.
- Comparable sales and active listings tables lack actual data.
- Graphs referenced are not embedded or populated in the PDF.
  > 💡 Populate all sections with real market data, embed graphs, and remove all placeholder text before delivery.

### ✅ `5ad0c554…` — score 6/10
- Does not explicitly identify or cite specific items from the 132 Things REALTORS Do list.
- Word brochure does not clearly include or embed photos or visuals.
- Double-sided brochure layout is not demonstrated or specified in the document.
  > 💡 Revise the brochure to cite specific numbered items from the 132 list and embed visuals in a true two-sided layout.

### ❌ `11593a50…` — score 3/10
- No MLSLI property selection or verification was performed.
- Tour book lacks required columns, photos, and two-page format.
- Map PDF has no pins and provides no location visualization.
  > 💡 Conduct an actual MLSLI search and populate full PDFs with qualifying listings and a pinned map.

### ✅ `94925f49…` — score 6/10
- School data and home listings are explicitly representative estimates, not sourced from live reputable platforms.
- Reports do not cite specific reputable sources like Niche or MLSLI as required.
- Neighboring schools information is largely absent from the reports.
  > 💡 Use verified data from cited reputable sources and replace representative estimates with confirmed statistics and listings.

### ✅ `90f37ff3…` — score 7/10
- Comparable properties lack lease or listing dates within the past three years.
- DOCX file omits the detailed market rent survey table.
- Data sources for comparables are not cited or referenced.
  > 💡 Add dated comparable details with sources and ensure both PDF and DOCX contain identical complete tables.

### ✅ `d3d255b2…` — score 8/10
- Text response is descriptive rather than summarizing key findings.
- Market analysis is referenced but not included as an attachment.
  > 💡 Include a brief executive summary in the text response and attach the referenced market analysis.

### ✅ `403b9234…` — score 8/10
- Minor grammatical error: "an 9-slide" should be "a 9-slide".
- Text response lacks a brief slide-by-slide content summary.
  > 💡 Include a concise slide outline in the text response to reinforce completeness.

### ✅ `1bff4551…` — score 6/10
- Includes a non-Black artist song, conflicting with program focus on Black rock musicians.
- Original song entry appears truncated and incomplete in the PDF preview.
- Connection of most acts to the Institute collection is not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Remove non-qualifying songs and verify completeness and collection relevance for all entries.

### ✅ `650adcb1…` — score 6/10
- Sixth tab summarizing interns’ time off requests is missing.
- Coverage gaps are frequent, exceeding the ideal two interns working daily.
- Schedule logic for five-on/two-off rotations appears inconsistent.
  > 💡 Add a dedicated time-off summary tab and rebalance rotations to reduce coverage gaps.

### ✅ `01d7e53e…` — score 7/10
- Primary contact phone and email information is missing and left as placeholders.
- Applicable federal, state, and city requirements section appears incomplete or truncated.
- Text response does not summarize key agreement terms for reviewer context.
  > 💡 Add complete contact details, verify all required sections are fully included, and briefly summarize agreement highlights.

### ✅ `0ec25916…` — score 8/10
- DOCX file lacks full SBAR table content beyond header.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing completed deliverable.
  > 💡 Ensure the DOCX mirrors the full PDF content and summarize outcomes, not intentions.

### ✅ `116e791e…` — score 7/10
- PDF is three pages, not the required one-page care plan.
  > 💡 Condense formatting and content to ensure the care plan fits on a single PDF page.

### ✅ `dd724c67…` — score 5/10
- Facility list is not comprehensive for all Long Island hospitals and rehabilitation facilities.
- CMS TFU timeframes and conditions appear generalized and may not match PY 2025 ACO REACH specifications.
- CMS_TFU_Reference_Guide sheet contains truncated or incomplete content.
  > 💡 Expand the facility list and align TFU details precisely with the CMS PY 2025 ACO REACH methodology.

### ❌ `7151c60a…` — score 4/10
- Both documents are missing the required company logo.
- Pre-screening checklist lacks required table format, page numbers, and comprehensive required elements.
- Checklist does not demonstrate inclusion of all items from the required patient information document.
  > 💡 Add the company logo, complete the checklist tables with all required elements, and include page numbers in the footer.

### ❌ `90edba97…` — score 4/10
- Did not enter any monthly or annual lab results as required.
- No treatment or medication changes documented per standing protocols.
- Some tracker sheets show incomplete or inconsistent patient naming.
  > 💡 Obtain the missing Patient Lab Reports with lab values and fully complete all trackers per protocols.

### ✅ `91060ff0…` — score 6/10
- Over-the-counter pharmacological treatments section lacks specific products, comparisons, or usage details.
- Poster lacks visual elements such as tables, icons, or graphics promised in the task.
- Layout and formatting do not clearly reflect a designed 36 x 24 inch poster.
  > 💡 Add structured visuals and detailed OTC treatment tables to improve completeness and usability.

### ✅ `8384083a…` — score 5/10
- Victoza days’ supply calculation is incorrect based on listed strength and dosing.
- Miebo days’ supply is approximate and inaccurate for standard QID both-eyes dosing.
- Table contains misspellings and truncated headers reducing professional clarity.
  > 💡 Correct dosing calculations, especially Victoza and Miebo, and clean table formatting for audit readiness.

### ✅ `045aba2e…` — score 8/10
- Daily checklist content appears truncated or incomplete in the facility and records section.
- Checklists lack explicit citations to specific California law or regulation sections.
  > 💡 Complete truncated text and add brief lawbook or self-assessment references for stronger compliance traceability.

### ❌ `f2986c1f…` — score 2/10
- Medications were not identified from the provided image.
- Drugs.com was not used to identify pill details.
- Spreadsheet contains only placeholder NA data without medication entries.
  > 💡 Analyze the image, identify each pill via Drugs.com, and populate complete medication details with MedlinePlus links.

### ❌ `ffed32d8…` — score 3/10
- Comparative table lacks medication-level cost, reimbursement, and revenue calculations.
- No evidence of using Wholesale Price or Reimbursement reference data.
- Revenue difference reported as $0.00 without supporting calculations.
  > 💡 Include detailed per-medication calculations using the provided reference data to support conclusions.

### ✅ `b3573f20…` — score 6/10
- PDF is six pages instead of the required three pages.
- Output claims three pages but delivered content does not match.
- Extra DOCX file produced beyond requested PDF deliverable.
  > 💡 Condense the content to exactly three PDF pages and align deliverables with stated requirements.

### ✅ `788d2bc6…` — score 6/10
- Deck appears heavily Amazon-focused with limited or missing TikTok Shop and influencer coverage.
- Several required service categories like A+ Content, reviews, and analytics are not clearly shown.
- Alignment with SERVICESV5.docx is not demonstrated or referenced.
  > 💡 Add dedicated slides covering all TikTok and creative services and confirm alignment with SERVICESV5.docx.

### ✅ `69a8ef86…` — score 8/10
- Inconsistent use of KAM versus KAR may confuse roles.
- External guidelines contain a visible typo and truncated word.
- External document preview does not clearly show full labeling requirements.
  > 💡 Align acronyms, fix typos, and explicitly list shipment labeling requirements in the external guidelines.

### ✅ `ab81b076…` — score 7/10
- PDF exceeds required 1–3 page limit.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing delivered content.
- Visual examples lack explicit annotations within the document.
  > 💡 Reduce PDF to three pages and add brief annotated captions explaining each visual example.

### ✅ `7ed932dd…` — score 6/10
- Delivered out-of-stock dates still occur before end of July for multiple SKUs.
- Excel file shows no visible highlighting for required pallets or earlier deliveries.
- No evidence calculations were validated against the provided reference tabs.
  > 💡 Extend additional shipments so delivered inventory covers the full remainder of July and apply clear Excel highlighting.

### ❌ `b57efde3…` — score 4/10
- Did not comprehensively review the official Aqua Nor 2025 exhibitor list.
- Prospecting list contains only four companies, far from representative coverage.
- Several fields contain verification placeholders instead of confirmed exhibitor data.
  > 💡 Expand the spreadsheet by systematically reviewing all relevant Aqua Nor 2025 exhibitors and validating each entry.

### ❌ `15d37511…` — score 3/10
- Spreadsheet lacks required numeric pricing, costs, margins, and percentages.
- Tiered pricing and discounts for volumes over 1,000 units are not applied.
- Year 1 total gross margin is missing and not calculated.
  > 💡 Populate spreadsheet with pricing email values, apply tiered discounts, and calculate all margins and totals.

### ✅ `bb863dd9…` — score 8/10
- Quotation date is missing despite validity being date-dependent.
- Completeness of all IEHK 2017 modules beyond basics is not fully evidenced.
  > 💡 Add a quotation date and explicitly confirm inclusion of every IEHK 2017 module.

### ✅ `fe0d3941…` — score 8/10
- Workflow slides cannot be verified against the referenced workflow step file.
  > 💡 Explicitly reference or summarize the workflow steps used from the provided reference file.

### ❌ `6a900a40…` — score 3/10
- Transport options with freight costs and grand totals are missing.
- Item remarks lack transit times and suitability reasoning for each transport option.
- General remarks red-font freight validity and reconfirmation notice is missing.
  > 💡 Revise the Excel file to include all required transport details, remarks, and general conditions per instructions.

### ✅ `9efbcd35…` — score 6/10
- Lacks specific MSCI performance data and figures for Q1 2025.
- Missing dedicated standalone sections for technology sector and CEEMEA.
- No explicit citations or references to MSCI or news sources.
  > 💡 Add concrete MSCI index returns, dedicated missing sections, and brief source attributions.

### ✅ `1d4672c8…` — score 6/10
- Used proxy data instead of extracting official MSCI return data as required.
- Excel file lacks a clearly documented correlation matrix tab.
- PDF analysis is brief and lacks detailed correlation metrics discussion.
  > 💡 Use official MSCI data, add a clear correlation matrix sheet, and expand quantitative analysis.

### ✅ `4de6a529…` — score 6/10
- Sub-asset class coverage appears incomplete versus the referenced opportunity set overview.
- Tables show formatting and labeling errors, including broken headers and misspellings.
- Evidence of using the attached PDF overview as a source is not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Expand and align all sub-asset classes to the referenced overview and correct table formatting.

### ✅ `4c4dc603…` — score 5/10
- PDF is two pages, not a concise one-page summary.
- Salient numbers like target raise, IRR, and market size are missing.
- Key economics lack specific figures and team member profiles lack names.
  > 💡 Condense to one page and add concrete metrics, token economics figures, and named team profiles.

### ✅ `bb499d9c…` — score 6/10
- Sales process lacks detailed step-by-step depth and customization by issuer group.
- Document shows truncated or incomplete sections for issuer and investor process models.
- No evidence of external industry research or CEO brief integration.
  > 💡 Expand process sections with detailed stages, issuer-specific variations, and cite industry best practices.

### ✅ `5349dd7b…` — score 6/10
- Carrier rate increases and flat rates are estimates, not researched from authoritative sources.
- USPS flat rate offerings are inaccurately represented for extra large box size.
- Business rate eligibility and assumptions are not clearly validated per carrier.
  > 💡 Replace estimated data with verified 2020–2025 rate sources and confirm valid flat rate offerings per carrier.

### ✅ `a4a9195c…` — score 8/10
- IPC-A-610G hyperlink is not explicitly included in the document.
- Procedures lack inspection, verification, and corrective action details.
- Reference standard is cited but not clearly integrated into procedures.
  > 💡 Add a clickable IPC-A-610G link and expand procedures with verification, audits, and corrective actions.

### ✅ `552b7dd0…` — score 6/10
- No evidence of total cost analysis provided.
- No evidence of average resolution time metrics shown.
- Incident data source Excel not referenced or summarized.
  > 💡 Include verified slides showing cost totals, resolution time statistics, and explicit linkage to the source spreadsheet.

### ❌ `11dcc268…` — score 4/10
- Location report lacks required headers and assigned Moved To locations.
- Quantities moved and partial receipt for P11-P09457-01 are not shown.
- Most rows and columns are blank, indicating incomplete population.
  > 💡 Fully populate the template using exact headers, assigned locations, and correct quantities per receiving log.

### ❌ `76418a2c…` — score 3/10
- Spreadsheet largely blank with missing pick ticket and customer data.
- Shipping method, weights, and savings not derived from provided parameters.
- Headers and columns do not match required manifest structure.
  > 💡 Populate the manifest using actual pick ticket data and shipping parameters with correct calculations and headers.

### ❌ `0e386e32…` — score 3/10
- ZIP size suggests missing or empty codebase.
- No evidence of smart contracts, zkSNARKs, or Aave/Connext integration.
- Text promises full prototype but deliverable content is unverified.
  > 💡 Include actual frontend code, Solidity contracts, and documentation files verifying all claimed components.

### ❌ `7de33b48…` — score 3/10
- Zip content not provided or verifiable; only a small archive with no file preview.
- No evidence of TypeScript JSX utility, tests, or WCAG ARIA22 validation.
- Original task requires concrete implementation, but response is only a descriptive promise.
  > 💡 Provide the full zip contents with actual source files, tests, and documentation for verification.

### ❌ `4122f866…` — score 4/10
- Terraform lacks SES domain identity, DKIM, MAIL FROM, and email template resources.
- API Gateway versioned stage and explicit /contact-us POST route not evidenced.
- README and code lack detailed reCAPTCHA validation, admin copy, and SES templating specifics.
  > 💡 Expand Terraform and Lambda code to fully implement SES identities, templates, API Gateway staging, and captcha validation.

### ✅ `2c249e0f…` — score 8/10
- API spec lacks defined authentication and authorization mechanisms.
- Data flow description omits SSD shipping workflow details for payload data.
  > 💡 Add security schemes and clarify offline payload transfer handling.

## Failure Analysis

The dominant hard-failure mode was brittle schema and shape handling in spreadsheet-style workflows. The large majority of terminal errors were not deep reasoning misses; they were parser assumptions about exact headers, row starts, or non-null cells. Evidence is concentrated in 7b08cd4d-df60-41ae-9102-8aaa49306ba2, 87da214f-fd92-4c58-9854-f4d0d10adce0, d4525420-a427-4ef2-b4e9-2dcc2d31b3b6, 45c6237b-f9c9-4526-9a8d-6a5c404624ec, a0552909-bc66-4a3a-8970-ee0d17b49718, f841ddcf-2a28-4f6d-bac3-61b607219d3e, d7cfae6f-4a82-4289-955e-c799dfe1e0f4, 19403010-3e5c-494e-a6d3-13594e99f6af, and 105f8ad0-8dd2-422f-9e88-2be5fbd2b215, all of which failed on missing columns, unexpected sheet shapes, or null values. Even a73fbc98-90d4-4134-a54f-2b1d0c838791 failed on NaN coercion in a table-count field. The remaining terminal failures were a code-synthesis syntax error in 854f3814-681c-4950-91ac-55b0db0e3781 and a file-validation/media issue in a46d5cd2-55fe-48fa-a4c6-6aaf6b9991b5.

Across the full 220-task set, the biggest quality divide was between text-centric document work and data-heavy or media-heavy production. Textual policy, memo, compliance, and legal tasks were usually strong: a328feea-47db-4856-b4be-2bdc63dd88fb, dfb4e0cd-a0b7-454e-b943-0dd586c2764c, eb54f575-93f9-408b-b9e0-f1208a0b6759, 3f625cb2-f40e-4ead-8a97-6924356d5989, ed2bc14c-99ac-4a2a-8467-482a1a5d67f3, and 74ed1dc7-1468-48a8-9071-58775c0d667a all landed at 9/10 or near it. By contrast, many nominally successful spreadsheet, code, CAD, and media tasks were substantively incomplete: 5f6c57dd-feb6-4e70-b152-4969d92d1608, b39a5aa7-cd1b-47ad-b249-90afd22f8f21, and 4520f882-715a-482d-8e87-1cb3cbdfe975 produced mostly empty finance workbooks; 02aa1805-c658-4069-8a6a-02dec146063a had no IEPA data; 0e386e32-df20-4d1f-b536-7159bc409ad5 and 7de33b48-5163-4f50-b5f3-8deea8185e57 produced unverifiable zip artifacts; 5e2b6aab-f9fb-4dd6-a1a5-874ef1743909 and 3940b7e7-ec4f-4cea-8097-3ab4cfdcaaa6 relied on placeholder engineering outputs.

Sector and occupation clustering reinforces that this is a modality problem, not just a sector problem. Retail had the weakest completion because failures clustered in spreadsheet-driven supervisor tasks and one investigator media task: d4525420-a427-4ef2-b4e9-2dcc2d31b3b6, 45c6237b-f9c9-4526-9a8d-6a5c404624ec, and a46d5cd2-55fe-48fa-a4c6-6aaf6b9991b5. Wholesale combined four terminal errors with many low-QA workbook builds in First-Line Supervisors, Order Clerks, and non-technical Sales Representatives, including 3f821c2d-ab97-46ec-a0fb-b8f73c2682bc, e996036e-8287-4e7f-8d0a-90a57cb53c45, f841ddcf-2a28-4f6d-bac3-61b607219d3e, d7cfae6f-4a82-4289-955e-c799dfe1e0f4, 19403010-3e5c-494e-a6d3-13594e99f6af, and 105f8ad0-8dd2-422f-9e88-2be5fbd2b215. Health Care is the clearest example of completion without confidence: it finished 24/25, but several successful outputs were hollow or placeholder-like, including 0353ee0c-18b5-4ad3-88e8-e001d223e1d7, 4d1a8410-e9c5-4be5-ab43-cc55563c594c, 61e7b9c6-0051-429f-a341-fda9b6578a84, f1be6436-ffff-4fee-9e66-d550291a1735, and 90edba97-74f0-425a-8ff6-8b93182eb7cb. Information reached 25/25 completion but still had many semantic misses in Film and Video Editors and Producers/Directors, such as e222075d-5d62-4757-ae3c-e34b0846583b, c94452e4-39cd-4846-b73a-ab75933d1ad7, 75401f7c-396d-406d-b08e-938874ad1045, a941b6d8-4289-4500-b45a-f8e4fc94a724, e4f664ea-0e5c-4e4e-a0d3-a87a33da947a, and a079d38f-c529-436a-beca-3e291f9e62a3.

Retries improved throughput but rarely fixed root cause. All 12 terminal errors had already been retried, which strongly suggests deterministic parser or generator breakage rather than transient instability. Even when retries converted runs to success, quality often remained low: e996036e-8287-4e7f-8d0a-90a57cb53c45 recovered only to qa 3, 327fbc21-7d26-4964-bf7c-f4f41e55c54d to qa 4, 5f6c57dd-feb6-4e70-b152-4969d92d1608 to qa 3, b39a5aa7-cd1b-47ad-b249-90afd22f8f21 to qa 3, and aa071045-bcb0-4164-bb85-97245d56287e to qa 4. Latency also did not buy quality: c94452e4-39cd-4846-b73a-ab75933d1ad7 took 55.8 seconds and still missed the required finished video, while strong text tasks such as dfb4e0cd-a0b7-454e-b943-0dd586c2764c at 13.0 seconds and a328feea-47db-4856-b4be-2bdc63dd88fb at 13.5 seconds were among the best. The pattern is that complexity increases failure risk mainly when the task needs exact schema adaptation, external data grounding, or true binary artifact generation.

## Recommendations

First, add a mandatory schema-discovery phase before any dataframe or workbook logic runs. The model should always inspect sheet names, detect the first non-empty header row, normalize whitespace and casing, build a synonym map, and only then bind columns. That would directly target the dominant failures in 7b08cd4d-df60-41ae-9102-8aaa49306ba2, 87da214f-fd92-4c58-9854-f4d0d10adce0, d4525420-a427-4ef2-b4e9-2dcc2d31b3b6, a0552909-bc66-4a3a-8970-ee0d17b49718, f841ddcf-2a28-4f6d-bac3-61b607219d3e, d7cfae6f-4a82-4289-955e-c799dfe1e0f4, 19403010-3e5c-494e-a6d3-13594e99f6af, and 105f8ad0-8dd2-422f-9e88-2be5fbd2b215. The execution environment should also surface a compact preflight report of observed headers and row counts so retries can be targeted to actual schema mismatch instead of rerunning the same brittle code.

Second, route tasks by deliverable modality instead of using one generic generation path. The current configuration is strong on text-first deliverables, as seen in a328feea-47db-4856-b4be-2bdc63dd88fb, dfb4e0cd-a0b7-454e-b943-0dd586c2764c, eb54f575-93f9-408b-b9e0-f1208a0b6759, and 74ed1dc7-1468-48a8-9071-58775c0d667a, but it is materially weaker on true media, CAD, and code artifacts. For tasks like e222075d-5d62-4757-ae3c-e34b0846583b, c94452e4-39cd-4846-b73a-ab75933d1ad7, a941b6d8-4289-4500-b45a-f8e4fc94a724, 5e2b6aab-f9fb-4dd6-a1a5-874ef1743909, and 0e386e32-df20-4d1f-b536-7159bc409ad5, provision specialized validators and toolchains: ffmpeg and media-duration checks for MP4/WAV outputs, image sniffing before docx embedding, STEP or CAD sanity checks, unzip plus syntax/test execution for code bundles. If those validators fail, trigger a modality-specific regeneration prompt rather than accepting a planning document as a completed artifact.

Third, tighten prompt engineering around grounded completion and self-verification. The model should be instructed to list explicit acceptance criteria before generation and then verify them after generation: page count, slide count, sheet count, formula density, nonblank-cell percentage, embedded media presence, live-source citations, and required file formats only. That would have caught many current success-but-low-QA cases such as 5f6c57dd-feb6-4e70-b152-4969d92d1608, b39a5aa7-cd1b-47ad-b249-90afd22f8f21, 4520f882-715a-482d-8e87-1cb3cbdfe975, 61e7b9c6-0051-429f-a341-fda9b6578a84, 6074bba3-7e3a-4b1c-b8c6-a15bb6695c3b, 11593a50-734d-4449-b5b4-f8986a133fd8, and f2986c1f-2bbf-4b83-bc93-624a9d617f45. The prompt should also explicitly ban meta-responses about intended work and require a short summary of completed content, because several tasks across sectors described plans rather than delivered substance.

Fourth, tune success metrics and retry policy to reflect true task completion, not just file creation. A practical threshold would be to auto-flag or auto-rerun any artifact with strong indicators such as placeholder text, missing final binary outputs, empty worksheets, zero-result calculations, or QA at 4 or below; many of the current nominal successes in e996036e-8287-4e7f-8d0a-90a57cb53c45, 327fbc21-7d26-4964-bf7c-f4f41e55c54d, 02aa1805-c658-4069-8a6a-02dec146063a, 0353ee0c-18b5-4ad3-88e8-e001d223e1d7, and a079d38f-c529-436a-beca-3e291f9e62a3 would fail that gate. Retries should be selective: one retry for transient execution faults, but deterministic schema or validator failures should switch to a recovery template that first inspects inputs and only then regenerates. This will likely reduce the headline completion rate, but it will raise the much more important rate of substantively correct deliverables.

## Deliverable Files

- `83d10b06…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `7d7fc9a7…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `43dc9778…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
- `ee09d943…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `f84ea6ac…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `a328feea…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `27e8912c…` (Government): 6 file(s)
- `17111c03…` (Government): 3 file(s)
- `c44e9b62…` (Government): 4 file(s)
- `99ac6944…` (Information): 5 file(s)
- `f9a1c16c…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `38889c3b…` (Information): 7 file(s)
- `ff85ee58…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `4b894ae3…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `1b1ade2d…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `93b336f3…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `15ddd28d…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `24d1e93f…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `05389f78…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `575f8679…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `a74ead3b…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `bbe0a93b…` (Government): 6 file(s)
- `85d95ce5…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `76d10872…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `36d567ba…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `7bbfcfe9…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `2696757c…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `dfb4e0cd…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `4c18ebae…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `cebf301e…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `c2e8f271…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `2ea2e5b5…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 5 file(s)
- `c357f0e2…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `a45bc83b…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 4 file(s)
- `a10ec48c…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `fccaa4a1…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 3 file(s)
- `f5d428fd…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 9 file(s)
- `2fa8e956…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `0e4fe8cd…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `a0ef404e…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `b7a5912e…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `aa071045…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `476db143…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 4 file(s)
- `61f546a8…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `f3351922…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `61717508…` (Finance and Insurance): 4 file(s)
- `0ed38524…` (Finance and Insurance): 4 file(s)
- `d025a41c…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `401a07f1…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `afe56d05…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `9a8c8e28…` (Information): 6 file(s)
- `3a4c347c…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `ec2fccc9…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `8c8fc328…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `e222075d…` (Information): 5 file(s)
- `c94452e4…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `75401f7c…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `a941b6d8…` (Information): 5 file(s)
- `8079e27d…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `e21cd746…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `9e8607e7…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `c7d83f01…` (Finance and Insurance): 5 file(s)
- `46b34f78…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `a1963a68…` (Finance and Insurance): 3 file(s)
- `5f6c57dd…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `b39a5aa7…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `b78fd844…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `4520f882…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `ec591973…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `62f04c2f…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `3f821c2d…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `e996036e…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `327fbc21…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `6dcae3f5…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `1aecc095…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 3 file(s)
- `0353ee0c…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `40a8c4b1…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `4d1a8410…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 3 file(s)
- `8c823e32…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `eb54f575…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `11e1b169…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `a95a5829…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `22c0809b…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `bf68f2ad…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `efca245f…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `9e39df84…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `68d8d901…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `1752cb53…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `bd72994f…` (Retail Trade): 3 file(s)
- `211d0093…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `cecac8f9…` (Retail Trade): 4 file(s)
- `8f9e8bcd…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `0fad6023…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `02314fc6…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `4d61a19a…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `6436ff9e…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `8a7b6fca…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `40a99a31…` (Manufacturing): 4 file(s)
- `b9665ca1…` (Manufacturing): 3 file(s)
- `c6269101…` (Manufacturing): 4 file(s)
- `be830ca0…` (Manufacturing): 6 file(s)
- `cd9efc18…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
- `a97369c7…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `3f625cb2…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
- `aad21e4c…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `8314d1b1…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `5e2b6aab…` (Manufacturing): 10 file(s)
- `46fc494e…` (Manufacturing): 7 file(s)
- `3940b7e7…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `8077e700…` (Manufacturing): 3 file(s)
- `5a2d70da…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `74d6e8b0…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `81db15ff…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `61b0946a…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `61e7b9c6…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `c9bf9801…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 4 file(s)
- `f1be6436…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 5 file(s)
- `41f6ef59…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `6d2c8e55…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 11 file(s)
- `4b98ccce…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 3 file(s)
- `60221cd0…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `ef8719da…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `3baa0009…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `5d0feb24…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `6974adea…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `1a78e076…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `1b9ec237…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `0112fc9b…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `772e7524…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `e6429658…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `b5d2e6f1…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `47ef842d…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `1137e2bb…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `c3525d4d…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `9a0d8d36…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `664a42e5…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `feb5eefc…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `3600de06…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `c657103b…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `ae0c1093…` (Retail Trade): 4 file(s)
- `f9f82549…` (Retail Trade): 3 file(s)
- `57b2cdf2…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `84322284…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `6241e678…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `e14e32ba…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `b1a79ce1…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `e4f664ea…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `a079d38f…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `02aa1805…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
- `fd6129bd…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
- `ce864f41…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `58ac1cc5…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 5 file(s)
- `3c19c6d1…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `a99d85fc…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `55ddb773…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `1e5a1d7f…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `0419f1c3…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `ed2bc14c…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `46bc7238…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 8 file(s)
- `2d06bc0a…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `fd3ad420…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `0818571f…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 14 file(s)
- `6074bba3…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 4 file(s)
- `5ad0c554…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `11593a50…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 4 file(s)
- `94925f49…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 5 file(s)
- `90f37ff3…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `d3d255b2…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `403b9234…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `1bff4551…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `650adcb1…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `01d7e53e…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `0ec25916…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `116e791e…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `dd724c67…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `7151c60a…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `90edba97…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `91060ff0…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `8384083a…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `045aba2e…` (Retail Trade): 6 file(s)
- `f2986c1f…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `ffed32d8…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `b3573f20…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `a69be28f…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `788d2bc6…` (Wholesale Trade): 7 file(s)
- `74ed1dc7…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `69a8ef86…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `ab81b076…` (Wholesale Trade): 5 file(s)
- `7ed932dd…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `b57efde3…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `15d37511…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `bb863dd9…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `fe0d3941…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `6a900a40…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `9efbcd35…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `1d4672c8…` (Finance and Insurance): 3 file(s)
- `4de6a529…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `4c4dc603…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `bb499d9c…` (Finance and Insurance): 3 file(s)
- `5349dd7b…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `a4a9195c…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `552b7dd0…` (Manufacturing): 3 file(s)
- `11dcc268…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `76418a2c…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `0e386e32…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `7de33b48…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `4122f866…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 6 file(s)
- `2c249e0f…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
