# Experiment Report: GPT-5.2 Reasoning MEDIUM — Full Benchmark (Ablation 2/4)

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| **Experiment ID** | `exp018_GPT52_reasoning_medium` |
| **Condition** | GPT-5.2 reasoning=medium + gpt-audio-1.5 preprocessor |
| **Model** | gpt-5.2-chat |
| **Execution Mode** | subprocess |
| **Date** | 2026-03-25 |
| **Duration** | 114m 28s |
| **Generated At** | 2026-03-25T21:42:52.864027+00:00 |
| 🤗 HF Dataset | [exp018_GPT52_reasoning_medium](https://huggingface.co/datasets/HyeonSang/exp018_GPT52_reasoning_medium) |
| 📊 Self-Report | [self_report.json](https://huggingface.co/datasets/HyeonSang/exp018_GPT52_reasoning_medium/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 Reasoning MEDIUM under Ablation 2/4 using the gpt-5.2-chat model with a gpt-audio-1.5 preprocessor, executed in subprocess mode on 2026-03-25. The benchmark covered 220 tasks spanning nine sectors, so the results are broad enough to assess both operational stability and variation in LLM-evaluated quality across business domains.

Task completion was strong: 214 of 220 tasks succeeded, for a 97.3% completion rate. There were 6 errors and 31 retried tasks, which indicates the system was generally robust but not fully frictionless under this configuration. From a deliverable-generation perspective, the run appears operationally reliable overall, with retries absorbing a meaningful share of recoverable issues.

Self-assessed confidence was moderate rather than uniformly high. The average Self-QA score was 6.09/10, with observed outputs ranging from 2 to 9. That profile suggests most tasks produced usable deliverables, but output quality and confidence were uneven, and a nontrivial minority of responses likely required closer review or refinement.

Key highlights are the combination of high completion and mixed quality by sector. Government achieved 25/25 success with the strongest average LLM-evaluated quality at 6.9/10, while Retail also performed efficiently at 20/20 success, 6.6/10, and relatively low latency. By contrast, Health Care and Professional/Scientific tasks were largely completed but had lower self-assessed confidence, and Information workloads were the slowest without a corresponding quality advantage.

## Key Metrics

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Total Tasks | 220 |
| Success | 214 (97.3%) |
| Errors | 6 |
| Retried Tasks | 31 |
| Avg QA Score | 6.09/10 |
| Min QA Score | 2/10 |
| Max QA Score | 9/10 |
| Avg Latency | 20,983ms |
| Max Latency | 46,355ms |
| Total LLM Time | 4616s |

## File Generation

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Tasks requiring files | 185 |
| Successfully generated | 180 (97.3%) |
| Failed → dummy created | 5 |

### Resume Rounds

| Round | Attempted | Recovered | Still Failed |
|-------|-----------|-----------|--------------|
| 1 | 19 | 19 | 0 |
| 2 | 12 | 6 | 6 |

## Quality Analysis

The Self-QA distribution indicates moderate central performance with noticeable spread. An average of 6.09/10, combined with a minimum of 2 and maximum of 9, points to outputs that were often adequate but not consistently strong. Without a full histogram, the exact concentration of mid-range versus low-confidence cases cannot be quantified, but the range alone shows meaningful variability in LLM-evaluated quality.

Sector differences were material. Government led on quality at 6.9/10 with perfect completion, suggesting stable behavior on those tasks. Retail (6.6/10, 20/20) and Finance (6.5/10, 23/25) also showed comparatively stronger self-assessed confidence, while Wholesale remained solid at 6.3/10 with 24/25 success. Information and Real Estate were middle-of-pack at 6.0/10, while Manufacturing trailed slightly at 5.8/10.

The lowest-confidence sectors were Health Care and Social Assistance and Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services, both at 5.4/10 despite 24/25 completion. This pattern suggests the model usually generated deliverables in those domains, but assessed them as less reliable or less complete than in public-sector, retail, or financial workflows. No occupation-level breakdown was provided, so occupation-specific conclusions are limited; however, the sector aggregates imply stronger performance on structured administrative or transactional tasks than on specialized expert-domain tasks.

Latency did not show a simple positive relationship with quality. Information had the highest average latency at 26.3s yet only 6.0/10 quality, while Retail and Wholesale were among the fastest sectors at 17.6s and 17.5s and still delivered relatively good self-assessed confidence. Government achieved the best quality at a moderate 21.4s average latency. Overall, slower execution in this run appears more indicative of task complexity or processing overhead than of better deliverable quality.

## Sector Breakdown

| Sector | Tasks | Success | Success% | Avg QA | Avg Latency |
|--------|-------|---------|----------|--------|-------------|
| Finance and Insurance | 25 | 23 | 92.0% | 6.48/10 | 21,789ms |
| Government | 25 | 25 | 100.0% | 6.88/10 | 21,362ms |
| Health Care and Social Assistance | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 5.38/10 | 18,774ms |
| Information | 25 | 25 | 100.0% | 6.04/10 | 26,306ms |
| Manufacturing | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 5.83/10 | 22,206ms |
| Professional, Scientific, and Technical  | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 5.42/10 | 21,742ms |
| Real Estate and Rental and Leasing | 25 | 25 | 100.0% | 6.0/10 | 20,883ms |
| Retail Trade | 20 | 20 | 100.0% | 6.6/10 | 17,610ms |
| Wholesale Trade | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 6.29/10 | 17,502ms |

## Task Results

| # | Task ID | Sector | Occupation | Status | Retry | Files | QA Score | Latency |
|---|---------|--------|------------|--------|-------|-------|----------|---------|
| 1 | `83d10b06…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 20084ms |
| 2 | `7b08cd4d…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 2/10 | 18745ms |
| 3 | `7d7fc9a7…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 19140ms |
| 4 | `43dc9778…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 23265ms |
| 5 | `ee09d943…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 15232ms |
| 6 | `f84ea6ac…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 24083ms |
| 7 | `a328feea…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 11452ms |
| 8 | `27e8912c…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 6 | 6/10 | 23421ms |
| 9 | `17111c03…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 3 | 8/10 | 23461ms |
| 10 | `c44e9b62…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 3 | 4/10 | 24187ms |
| 11 | `99ac6944…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 5 | 6/10 | 24463ms |
| 12 | `f9a1c16c…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 15416ms |
| 13 | `38889c3b…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | Yes | 6 | 7/10 | 29850ms |
| 14 | `ff85ee58…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 46355ms |
| 15 | `4b894ae3…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 16683ms |
| 16 | `1b1ade2d…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 22915ms |
| 17 | `93b336f3…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 21748ms |
| 18 | `15ddd28d…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 25189ms |
| 19 | `24d1e93f…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 15176ms |
| 20 | `05389f78…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 27181ms |
| 21 | `575f8679…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 18607ms |
| 22 | `a74ead3b…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 17446ms |
| 23 | `bbe0a93b…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 6 | 7/10 | 25679ms |
| 24 | `85d95ce5…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 34142ms |
| 25 | `76d10872…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 20864ms |
| 26 | `36d567ba…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 21593ms |
| 27 | `7bbfcfe9…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 17863ms |
| 28 | `2696757c…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 17068ms |
| 29 | `dfb4e0cd…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 14968ms |
| 30 | `4c18ebae…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 30111ms |
| 31 | `cebf301e…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 21964ms |
| 32 | `c2e8f271…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 30851ms |
| 33 | `2ea2e5b5…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 5 | 5/10 | 18857ms |
| 34 | `c357f0e2…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 23510ms |
| 35 | `a45bc83b…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 24043ms |
| 36 | `a10ec48c…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 1 | 2/10 | 16798ms |
| 37 | `fccaa4a1…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 21614ms |
| 38 | `f5d428fd…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 9 | 7/10 | 22126ms |
| 39 | `2fa8e956…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 27550ms |
| 40 | `0e4fe8cd…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 20368ms |
| 41 | `a0ef404e…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 20509ms |
| 42 | `b7a5912e…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 14926ms |
| 43 | `aa071045…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 14793ms |
| 44 | `476db143…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | - | 4 | 3/10 | 18651ms |
| 45 | `61f546a8…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 18840ms |
| 46 | `f3351922…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 14731ms |
| 47 | `61717508…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 4 | 8/10 | 23065ms |
| 48 | `0ed38524…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 4 | 7/10 | 15656ms |
| 49 | `87da214f…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 16654ms |
| 50 | `d025a41c…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 16677ms |
| 51 | `401a07f1…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 26562ms |
| 52 | `afe56d05…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 36625ms |
| 53 | `9a8c8e28…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 6 | 6/10 | 27629ms |
| 54 | `3a4c347c…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 21965ms |
| 55 | `ec2fccc9…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 24641ms |
| 56 | `8c8fc328…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 14845ms |
| 57 | `e222075d…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 5 | 6/10 | 25989ms |
| 58 | `c94452e4…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 11 | 4/10 | 25746ms |
| 59 | `75401f7c…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 3/10 | 28163ms |
| 60 | `a941b6d8…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 5 | 3/10 | 33878ms |
| 61 | `8079e27d…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 17011ms |
| 62 | `e21cd746…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 23038ms |
| 63 | `9e8607e7…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 38905ms |
| 64 | `c7d83f01…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | Yes | 3 | 4/10 | 29060ms |
| 65 | `46b34f78…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 32790ms |
| 66 | `a1963a68…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 22178ms |
| 67 | `5f6c57dd…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 18697ms |
| 68 | `b39a5aa7…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 20271ms |
| 69 | `b78fd844…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 27245ms |
| 70 | `4520f882…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 17359ms |
| 71 | `ec591973…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 13141ms |
| 72 | `62f04c2f…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 19668ms |
| 73 | `3f821c2d…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 15928ms |
| 74 | `e996036e…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 5/10 | 15933ms |
| 75 | `327fbc21…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 19653ms |
| 76 | `6dcae3f5…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 4/10 | 15893ms |
| 77 | `1aecc095…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 4/10 | 20967ms |
| 78 | `0353ee0c…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 3/10 | 15688ms |
| 79 | `40a8c4b1…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 15827ms |
| 80 | `4d1a8410…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 3/10 | 18943ms |
| 81 | `8c823e32…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 20101ms |
| 82 | `eb54f575…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 20011ms |
| 83 | `11e1b169…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 17491ms |
| 84 | `a95a5829…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 19208ms |
| 85 | `22c0809b…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 18941ms |
| 86 | `bf68f2ad…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 18420ms |
| 87 | `efca245f…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 19894ms |
| 88 | `9e39df84…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 5 | 4/10 | 21620ms |
| 89 | `68d8d901…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 19947ms |
| 90 | `1752cb53…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 8/10 | 13892ms |
| 91 | `bd72994f…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 20040ms |
| 92 | `211d0093…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 13404ms |
| 93 | `d4525420…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 11909ms |
| 94 | `45c6237b…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 22418ms |
| 95 | `cecac8f9…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 5 | 6/10 | 27616ms |
| 96 | `8f9e8bcd…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 19059ms |
| 97 | `0fad6023…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 7/10 | 15962ms |
| 98 | `02314fc6…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 15054ms |
| 99 | `4d61a19a…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 19586ms |
| 100 | `6436ff9e…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 20098ms |
| 101 | `8a7b6fca…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 17573ms |
| 102 | `40a99a31…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 21997ms |
| 103 | `b9665ca1…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 24603ms |
| 104 | `c6269101…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 25439ms |
| 105 | `be830ca0…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 6 | 6/10 | 33166ms |
| 106 | `cd9efc18…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 23212ms |
| 107 | `a97369c7…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 26051ms |
| 108 | `3f625cb2…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 20155ms |
| 109 | `aad21e4c…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 24552ms |
| 110 | `8314d1b1…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 29240ms |
| 111 | `5e2b6aab…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 12 | 5/10 | 25472ms |
| 112 | `46fc494e…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 5 | 3/10 | 29085ms |
| 113 | `3940b7e7…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 25727ms |
| 114 | `8077e700…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 27868ms |
| 115 | `5a2d70da…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 29069ms |
| 116 | `74d6e8b0…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 21277ms |
| 117 | `81db15ff…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 13215ms |
| 118 | `61b0946a…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 22569ms |
| 119 | `61e7b9c6…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 12890ms |
| 120 | `c9bf9801…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 4 | 7/10 | 30059ms |
| 121 | `f1be6436…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 5 | 4/10 | 24623ms |
| 122 | `41f6ef59…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 12559ms |
| 123 | `a0552909…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 21729ms |
| 124 | `6d2c8e55…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 11 | 4/10 | 20702ms |
| 125 | `4b98ccce…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 17613ms |
| 126 | `60221cd0…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 16996ms |
| 127 | `ef8719da…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 19819ms |
| 128 | `3baa0009…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 25918ms |
| 129 | `5d0feb24…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 23446ms |
| 130 | `6974adea…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 38060ms |
| 131 | `1a78e076…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 25208ms |
| 132 | `1b9ec237…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 18986ms |
| 133 | `0112fc9b…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 14445ms |
| 134 | `772e7524…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 15462ms |
| 135 | `e6429658…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 24915ms |
| 136 | `b5d2e6f1…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 17422ms |
| 137 | `f841ddcf…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 15850ms |
| 138 | `47ef842d…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 20428ms |
| 139 | `1137e2bb…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 17589ms |
| 140 | `c3525d4d…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 19750ms |
| 141 | `9a0d8d36…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 16357ms |
| 142 | `664a42e5…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 16896ms |
| 143 | `feb5eefc…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 24156ms |
| 144 | `3600de06…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 14827ms |
| 145 | `c657103b…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 19385ms |
| 146 | `ae0c1093…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 4 | 8/10 | 17667ms |
| 147 | `f9f82549…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 8 | 7/10 | 17517ms |
| 148 | `57b2cdf2…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 19838ms |
| 149 | `84322284…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 18516ms |
| 150 | `a46d5cd2…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 7/10 | 18133ms |
| 151 | `6241e678…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 27897ms |
| 152 | `e14e32ba…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 26838ms |
| 153 | `b1a79ce1…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 27615ms |
| 154 | `e4f664ea…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 30203ms |
| 155 | `a079d38f…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 22038ms |
| 156 | `02aa1805…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 2 | 3/10 | 16853ms |
| 157 | `fd6129bd…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 24798ms |
| 158 | `ce864f41…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 18457ms |
| 159 | `58ac1cc5…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 5 | 8/10 | 21698ms |
| 160 | `3c19c6d1…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 20099ms |
| 161 | `a99d85fc…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 23890ms |
| 162 | `55ddb773…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 26933ms |
| 163 | `1e5a1d7f…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 19206ms |
| 164 | `0419f1c3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 27665ms |
| 165 | `ed2bc14c…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 30692ms |
| 166 | `46bc7238…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 8 | 6/10 | 17161ms |
| 167 | `2d06bc0a…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 16600ms |
| 168 | `fd3ad420…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 13350ms |
| 169 | `0818571f…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 27531ms |
| 170 | `6074bba3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 4 | 3/10 | 18691ms |
| 171 | `5ad0c554…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 15445ms |
| 172 | `11593a50…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 4 | 3/10 | 22005ms |
| 173 | `94925f49…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | Yes | 11 | 7/10 | 27512ms |
| 174 | `90f37ff3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 15942ms |
| 175 | `d3d255b2…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 23287ms |
| 176 | `403b9234…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 17514ms |
| 177 | `1bff4551…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 27666ms |
| 178 | `650adcb1…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 18715ms |
| 179 | `01d7e53e…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 29043ms |
| 180 | `a73fbc98…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 5/10 | 20419ms |
| 181 | `0ec25916…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 17033ms |
| 182 | `116e791e…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 15287ms |
| 183 | `dd724c67…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 20654ms |
| 184 | `7151c60a…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 17092ms |
| 185 | `90edba97…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 15712ms |
| 186 | `91060ff0…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 18304ms |
| 187 | `8384083a…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 15630ms |
| 188 | `045aba2e…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 6 | 8/10 | 15760ms |
| 189 | `f2986c1f…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 7651ms |
| 190 | `ffed32d8…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 2 | 2/10 | 18046ms |
| 191 | `b3573f20…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 15767ms |
| 192 | `a69be28f…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 10 | 8/10 | 18020ms |
| 193 | `788d2bc6…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 7 | 8/10 | 23419ms |
| 194 | `74ed1dc7…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 19618ms |
| 195 | `69a8ef86…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 20001ms |
| 196 | `ab81b076…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 4 | 8/10 | 20253ms |
| 197 | `d7cfae6f…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 4/10 | 18444ms |
| 198 | `19403010…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 18089ms |
| 199 | `7ed932dd…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 13801ms |
| 200 | `105f8ad0…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 5/10 | 15304ms |
| 201 | `b57efde3…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 12355ms |
| 202 | `15d37511…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 14438ms |
| 203 | `bb863dd9…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 17487ms |
| 204 | `fe0d3941…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 18822ms |
| 205 | `6a900a40…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 16371ms |
| 206 | `9efbcd35…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 27812ms |
| 207 | `1d4672c8…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | Yes | 3 | 6/10 | 18738ms |
| 208 | `4de6a529…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 28437ms |
| 209 | `4c4dc603…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 17730ms |
| 210 | `bb499d9c…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 27057ms |
| 211 | `5349dd7b…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 15101ms |
| 212 | `a4a9195c…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 21169ms |
| 213 | `552b7dd0…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 21277ms |
| 214 | `11dcc268…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 17349ms |
| 215 | `76418a2c…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 14267ms |
| 216 | `0e386e32…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 14288ms |
| 217 | `7de33b48…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 22373ms |
| 218 | `854f3814…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 20263ms |
| 219 | `4122f866…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 6 | 5/10 | 24585ms |
| 220 | `2c249e0f…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 21239ms |

## QA Issues

### ✅ `83d10b06…` — score 6/10
- Selected Sample sheet includes full population instead of only sampled rows.
- Sampling criteria coverage not evidenced; many required criteria likely unmet.
- Column naming and structure deviate from specified columns H–K.
  > 💡 Filter Tab 1 to only sampled rows and clearly demonstrate coverage of all selection criteria.

### ❌ `7b08cd4d…` — score 2/10
- Revenue detail lacks tour stop data, tax rates application, and net revenue calculations.
- Expenses missing required categories and source separation with all totals zero.
- P&L summary contains placeholder zeros and incomplete formatting.
  > 💡 Populate all sheets with complete data, calculations, categories, sources, and accurate USD totals per requirements.

### ❌ `7d7fc9a7…` — score 4/10
- Ending balances do not reconcile to provided April GL balances.
- BCBS prepaid insurance invoices and monthly billing are entirely missing.
- Schedules lack month-by-month amortization and balance rollforward detail.
  > 💡 Rebuild schedules with monthly columns, include BCBS, and reconcile all balances to GL through April 2025.

### ❌ `43dc9778…` — score 4/10
- Form 1040 is a narrative summary, not an actual completed IRS form.
- Schedules and forms are listed but not individually completed or included.
- Income, tax, and credit amounts are not calculated or shown.
  > 💡 Prepare a fully completed IRS Form 1040 PDF with calculated amounts and attached required schedules.

### ❌ `ee09d943…` — score 4/10
- CFO-reserved Tabs 1, 2, 2a, and 3 appear in the Table of Contents.
- Multiple sheets and headers still reference March dates instead of April.
- April source files were not clearly reflected or reconciled in updated schedules.
  > 💡 Remove CFO tabs, update all dates to April, and fully integrate April source files into each schedule.

### ❌ `f84ea6ac…` — score 3/10
- Document lacks the required comparison table and point-form study summaries.
- No five specific post-2020 publicly available articles are identified or reviewed.
- Content is incomplete and does not meet the stated deliverable claims.
  > 💡 Add a one-page table summarizing five cited post-2020 public studies with findings and implications.

### ✅ `a328feea…` — score 8/10
- No backup contact specified if supervisor or team lead is unreachable.
- No consequences outlined for failure to follow reporting procedure.
- Does not specify documentation method or HR notification timeframe.
  > 💡 Add backup contacts, compliance consequences, and clear documentation and HR notification timelines.

### ✅ `27e8912c…` — score 6/10
- Checklist does not cite or link to a credible source such as NIH.
- Ergonomic images lack public-domain source attribution.
- Organizational action items document lacks a completed tracking table with required fields.
  > 💡 Add explicit NIH citation, image attributions, and a fully structured action-tracking table with all required columns.

### ✅ `17111c03…` — score 8/10
- Excel schedule dates are in 2025 while memo is dated March 25, 2026.
  > 💡 Align the schedule year with the memo date or clarify that the schedule is a sample reference.

### ❌ `c44e9b62…` — score 4/10
- Planned reductions achieve only about 1.5%, not the required minimum 4%.
- Revised organizational chart shows no total FTE reduction and includes erroneous entries.
- Required 10% regional staffing reduction is not reflected in the files.
  > 💡 Recalculate reductions to meet 4% minimum and correct charts and reports accordingly.

### ✅ `99ac6944…` — score 6/10
- Mixer incorrectly claims onboard compression; Allen & Heath ZED-10FX has none.
- PDF lacks actual clickable web links to retailers or products.
- Compression requirement for vocal IEM mixes is not technically fulfilled.
  > 💡 Select an analog mixer with true onboard compression or add an analog compressor within budget.

### ✅ `f9a1c16c…` — score 6/10
- Singer monitor wedges are shown but not listed as outputs.
- Drummer wedge vocal mix requirements are not specified.
- Input/output lists lack clear correspondence to numbered stage positions.
  > 💡 Add explicit Vox1 and Vox2 wedge outputs and clarify drum wedge mix details.

### ✅ `38889c3b…` — score 7/10
- No evidence the provided drum reference track was actually used or synchronized.
- Musical keys and bridge timing cannot be verified from delivered files.
- Bridge delivered as a stem is unconventional and may confuse the recording engineer.
  > 💡 Include a session notes document confirming tempo, keys, bridge timing, and drum reference usage.

### ✅ `ff85ee58…` — score 8/10
- No objective proof of loudness and true peak compliance is provided.
- Performance tightening lacks explicit grid-based eighth-note edit details.
  > 💡 Include loudness meter screenshots and detailed edit markers confirming timing and peak compliance.

### ✅ `4b894ae3…` — score 6/10
- No bass note replacements performed despite requirement to correct wrong or dissonant notes.
- Edit report does not reference or attach the provided Bass Edit Spots document.
- Cannot verify bass level matches Rough Mix reference as required.
  > 💡 Include documented note replacements from repeated sections and explicitly align edits to provided timecodes.

### ✅ `93b336f3…` — score 6/10
- Joint venture ownership structure was invented without requirement.
- Cost and savings calculations lack transparent step-by-step detail and appear inaccurate.
- Risk section appears incomplete or truncated in the document.
  > 💡 Revise with explicit cost calculations, remove unstated assumptions, and complete all sections fully.

### ✅ `15ddd28d…` — score 8/10
- Does not explicitly quantify short-term buffer plan against three-week supply stoppage.
- Limited use of demand and capacity numbers in negotiation leverage.
- Risk mitigation actions during transition could be more granular.
  > 💡 Add a quantified short-term continuity plan and stronger numeric leverage using demand and capacity data.

### ❌ `24d1e93f…` — score 4/10
- Excel sheets contain placeholders with no vendor data or calculations.
- NPV calculations, cash flows, and discounting logic are missing.
- Summary sheet lacks NPV values, recommendation, and supporting comments.

### ✅ `05389f78…` — score 6/10
- Cost comparison lacks INR calculations from provided quotation file.
- Alternate supplier analysis is qualitative despite requirement for detailed comparative costing.
- Report does not explicitly reference or tabulate Model A HL quotes data.
  > 💡 Include a quantified INR cost comparison table using the provided quotation figures.

### ✅ `575f8679…` — score 8/10
- Summative evaluation endpoint timing is not explicitly defined.
- Cultural and linguistic adaptation procedures are briefly mentioned but not detailed.
- Appendix instruments lack sample questions or direct links for all tools.
  > 💡 Add a clear evaluation timeline, expand cultural adaptation plans, and include sample items or links for each instrument.

### ✅ `a74ead3b…` — score 5/10
- Content not verified against required manuals and admits deviation from specified session material.
- Manual access limitation undermines requirement to closely follow provided program content.
- Response includes justification instead of confirming strict adherence to task requirements.
  > 💡 Revise presentations to explicitly align each slide with the official Session 13 and 14 manual content.

### ✅ `bbe0a93b…` — score 7/10
- Resource guide not based on an open web search as explicitly required.
- Transportation resources category is missing from the resource guide.
- English needs assessment DOCX lacks the required screening table content.
  > 💡 Conduct a verified web search, add transportation resources, and align DOCX content with the PDFs.

### ❌ `85d95ce5…` — score 4/10
- Template placeholders and duplicate sections remain unedited, including XX and generic prompts.
- Incorrect school name appears instead of required placeholder "SCHOOL".
- Report structure suggests incomplete polishing and possible noncompliance with 8–15 page requirement.
  > 💡 Fully clean the template, ensure all placeholders are replaced, and verify formatting and length compliance.

### ✅ `76d10872…` — score 8/10
- Text response contains unnecessary CONFIDENCE tag.
- No explicit investigator signature or approval section shown.
  > 💡 Remove extraneous confidence tags and include a formal signature or approval section.

### ✅ `36d567ba…` — score 8/10
- Some Uniform Guidance citations are broad and could be more specific.
  > 💡 Refine citations for topics 8–10 to reference the most precise applicable sections.

### ✅ `7bbfcfe9…` — score 8/10
- Section 3937 notice question may misstate effective date by conditioning on receipt of notice.
- Section 3919 questions focus only on credit, omitting insurance or guaranty transactions.
  > 💡 Refine statutory alignment wording and broaden §3919 questions to cover all covered financial transactions.

### ✅ `2696757c…` — score 8/10
- An extra DOCX file was produced despite the requirement for a single PDF deliverable.
- The PDF is two pages, not the single page stated in the response.
  > 💡 Provide only the final PDF and ensure it matches stated formatting expectations.

### ✅ `4c18ebae…` — score 8/10
- SAR narrative lacks specific transaction dates and dollar amounts.
- No explicit law enforcement case number or agency contact cited.
- Excel transaction file content not independently verified in preview.
  > 💡 Include concrete transaction examples and reference the law enforcement tip details for completeness.

### ✅ `cebf301e…` — score 8/10
- Does not explicitly confirm reuse or compatibility with existing Express REST API.
- Access control mechanisms are described but lack concrete implementation details.
  > 💡 Clarify API alignment with existing Express services and specify authorization enforcement patterns.

### ✅ `c2e8f271…` — score 8/10
- Section title "Monorepo Con" appears truncated or incomplete.
- Document owner listed as VP of Engineering may conflict with authorship context.
  > 💡 Fix the truncated heading and clarify document ownership versus authorship roles.

### ✅ `2ea2e5b5…` — score 5/10
- Output lacks explicit activity-to-segment classification per provided definitions.
- No evidence the Excel source data was used or referenced.
- Strategic level classifications are incomplete or inconsistently applied.
  > 💡 Add clear tables mapping each activity to margin impact, time sensitivity, and strategic level using the source data.

### ❌ `c357f0e2…` — score 3/10
- Test plan contains only 52 test cases, below required 80–100.
- Test cases are not populated; most cells are blank.
- Roles, modules, scenarios, and expected results are missing.
  > 💡 Populate 80–100 fully defined, role-based UAT test cases per the implementation outline.

### ✅ `a45bc83b…` — score 6/10
- Cloud Armor is incorrectly described as providing Layer 3/4 DDoS protection.
- Proposed diagram does not clearly use official GCP icons as required.
- Architecture summary lacks explicit enterprise security controls like IAM or VPC Service Controls.
  > 💡 Correct security claims, update the diagram with official GCP icons, and expand enterprise security details.

### ❌ `a10ec48c…` — score 2/10
- Required tables with five columns and restaurant entries are missing.
- No restaurants sourced from DowntownSarasota.com or Google Maps.
- Placeholder offline note replaces required populated content.
  > 💡 Populate complete tables with verified restaurant data, links, hours, directions, and categories.

### ✅ `fccaa4a1…` — score 7/10
- PDF length is three pages instead of the requested two pages.
- Age requirement states 2–14, conflicting with the 16-year-old participant.
- Tour operator details are not explicitly sourced from TakeWalks.com.
  > 💡 Reduce the PDF to two pages, correct age requirements, and clearly cite TakeWalks.com details.

### ✅ `f5d428fd…` — score 7/10
- Royalty-free image sources are not cited or attributed anywhere.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing delivered itinerary.
- PDF page count is not explicitly confirmed as two pages.
  > 💡 Add clear royalty-free image source citations and confirm the PDF is exactly two pages.

### ✅ `2fa8e956…` — score 5/10
- Task requested all wineries within one hour, but document contains only a curated selection.
- Required formatting details and footer styling are not verifiable from content preview.
- Explicit source citations and Google Maps references are not included in the document.
  > 💡 Clarify scope as a curated list and add visible sources, formatting compliance, and footer verification.

### ✅ `0e4fe8cd…` — score 6/10
- June 4 sheet has inconsistent columns and missing Links column.
- Return journey lacks detailed private flight timing and ground logistics.
- Several actions lack confirmed service providers or reservation confirmations.
  > 💡 Standardize all sheets, add complete return travel details, and confirm providers with links.

### ✅ `b7a5912e…` — score 6/10
- Payment and booking revenue totals do not reconcile with total reported revenue.
- Several booking sources or payment methods appear missing from summaries.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing actual results.
  > 💡 Reconcile totals with source data and ensure all revenues, sources, and payments are fully captured.

### ✅ `aa071045…` — score 6/10
- Revenue by vehicle category and damage type totals do not reconcile with total damage revenue.
- Excel analysis likely omits additional damage types or entries from the source data.
  > 💡 Recheck the source dataset and ensure all revenue breakdowns sum exactly to the reported total.

### ❌ `476db143…` — score 3/10
- Tracking document contains no resident, unit, or date data.
- Reference files MOVE_OUT RPT and NOTES were not used.
- Inspection dates were not customized per resident responses.
  > 💡 Populate the tracking PDF using reference data and reflect individual inspection dates.

### ✅ `61f546a8…` — score 6/10
- Section 1 is organized by apartment, not by vendor as required.
- Vendor lists are inconsistent with scheduled services for some units.
- New appliance ordering status is not explicitly stated for each unit.
  > 💡 Reformat Section 1 by vendor and clearly state appliance order requirements per apartment.

### ✅ `f3351922…` — score 8/10
- Email contains placeholder fields for client and sender names.
  > 💡 Replace placeholders with actual names and consider minor personalization before sending.

### ✅ `61717508…` — score 8/10
- Training deck appears shorter than the requested approximately 10 pages.
- Visual design and color elements are minimal rather than clearly structured.
  > 💡 Expand the training deck with visuals and examples to reach the intended length and engagement.

### ✅ `0ed38524…` — score 7/10
- Multiple spelling and grammar errors reduce professionalism.
- Inconsistent formatting and punctuation across districts.
- Some statements appear unclear or potentially inaccurate.
  > 💡 Proofread carefully and standardize formatting before final submission.

### ✅ `d025a41c…` — score 7/10
- Case titles are not shown in bold as explicitly required.
- Document line spacing of 1.5 is not evidenced or confirmed.
- Formatting requirements are claimed but not verifiable from the content preview.
  > 💡 Ensure required formatting like bold headings and 1.5 line spacing are clearly applied and verified.

### ✅ `401a07f1…` — score 7/10
- Editorial may be under the requested 500-word length.
- Preview does not clearly show explicit clickable reference links.
  > 💡 Confirm word count meets 500 words and ensure all references are clearly hyperlinked.

### ✅ `afe56d05…` — score 9/10
- Some sections rely on narrative guidance rather than clearly labeled do and don’t points.
  > 💡 Add brief bullet-point do and don’t summaries at the end of each section for quick reference.

### ✅ `9a8c8e28…` — score 6/10
- Framework guide is very brief and lacks detailed best-practice framework.
- Further reading lists resources without actual links.
- Quiz and checklist content depth is unclear from provided preview.
  > 💡 Expand all documents with more detail, explicit links, and clearly evidenced quiz explanations.

### ✅ `3a4c347c…` — score 5/10
- Draft lacks a complete four-week publication and broadcast schedule.
- KPIs section is missing or not clearly detailed.
- CTO interviewee list appears incomplete or truncated.
  > 💡 Add a clear weekly schedule, explicit KPIs including sponsorship success, and complete all CTO interview entries.

### ❌ `ec2fccc9…` — score 3/10
- Article is far under 1,500 words and lacks required depth.
- Secondary SEO keywords list, pull quote, and caption are missing.
- Formatting, headings, links, and reference requirements are incomplete.
  > 💡 Expand the article to full length and add all specified SEO, formatting, and content elements.

### ✅ `8c8fc328…` — score 8/10
- Provided reference voiceover content is not explicitly integrated or cited.
- No notes addressing broadcast versus internet delivery considerations.
  > 💡 Explicitly align sections with the supplied voiceover and note any platform-specific considerations.

### ✅ `e222075d…` — score 6/10
- Final 30-second H.264 MP4 export was not delivered as required.
- Stock log uses generic search URLs instead of direct clip links.
- No assembled video edit with watermarked preview footage was provided.
  > 💡 Deliver a complete 30-second MP4 edit using specific watermarked stock clips with direct URLs.

### ❌ `c94452e4…` — score 4/10
- Did not deliver required 15-second H.264 MP4 broadcast file.
- Used pre-production assets instead of finished edited commercial.
- No evidence of using provided PSD supers or sourcing stock footage.
  > 💡 Produce and deliver the final 15-second MP4 using stock footage, PSD supers, and edited music as specified.

### ❌ `75401f7c…` — score 3/10
- No final MP4 showreel video was produced as required.
- Deliverables provide planning documents instead of the edited reel.
- EDL contains formatting errors and truncated or corrupted entries.
  > 💡 Produce and deliver the actual 01:20 edited MP4 showreel matching all specified technical and creative requirements.

### ❌ `a941b6d8…` — score 3/10
- No final video file was created or delivered.
- Core VFX tasks were documented but not actually executed.
- Flash and smoke effects were not implemented as footage.
  > 💡 Produce and deliver the fully composited video matching all technical and creative requirements.

### ❌ `8079e27d…` — score 3/10
- No actual S&P 500 company or sub-sector data populated in the Excel file.
- Deliverable relies on placeholders despite requirement to leverage publicly available data.
- Missing required analysis of companies trading above or below historical P/E averages.
  > 💡 Populate the Excel with real S&P 500 data sourced from public markets and include sortable valuation analysis.

### ✅ `e21cd746…` — score 6/10
- Only two private targets listed, limiting breadth of key last mile players.
- Public Market Valuation Context slide appears largely empty or lacks analysis.
- Some private company valuation and funding figures appear unsupported or potentially inaccurate.
  > 💡 Expand private target list and add clearer valuation analysis with sourced assumptions.

### ❌ `c7d83f01…` — score 4/10
- Python notebook not delivered; only a minimal .py script provided.
- Code implementation is missing or insufficiently documented for required methodologies.
- Visualizations are incomplete, with only one convergence plot provided.
  > 💡 Provide a fully implemented Jupyter notebook with complete methods, documentation, and comprehensive visual analysis.

### ✅ `46b34f78…` — score 6/10
- Bond issuers are generic placeholders without specific names or securities.
- No explicit use or citation of the provided reference data is shown.
- Portfolio constraints are discussed qualitatively without quantitative allocation details.
  > 💡 Specify real issuers, cite reference data explicitly, and include quantified allocations and duration metrics.

### ✅ `a1963a68…` — score 8/10
- Explicit data sources and citations are not clearly referenced on slides.
- Future-proofing and sustainability initiatives are not visibly detailed in preview.
  > 💡 Add explicit source citations and strengthen future-proofing slide with concrete sustainability initiatives.

### ❌ `b39a5aa7…` — score 3/10
- Calculations and summaries are empty with no formulas or computed values.
- Missing headcount roster and detailed assumptions from the attached file.
- Future projections lack populated results and year-over-year growth calculations.
  > 💡 Populate all tabs with formulas driven by inputs, include roster data, and complete projections with Y/Y growth.

### ✅ `4520f882…` — score 5/10
- CBA excerpt rules are not explicitly implemented or referenced in calculations.
- Spreadsheet lacks schedule, performance counts, and per-week payroll breakdowns.
- No evident validation or conditional formatting to flag CBA conflicts.
  > 💡 Incorporate detailed CBA rules, scheduling inputs, and automated validations with visible conflict warnings.

### ✅ `ec591973…` — score 6/10
- Text response is meta and future-tense, not a delivered executive slide summary.
- No evidence the slide details channel-specific assortment, CRM, and loyalty tactics.
- Business challenges are not visibly addressed due to lack of content preview.
  > 💡 Include a brief slide content summary or screenshots confirming all required elements are covered.

### ✅ `62f04c2f…` — score 7/10
- Excel form lacks signature and date spaces for sales rep, GM, and Sales Manager.
- Excel form does not note prepaid freight and restocking fee at the bottom.
- Overview document omits stated benefits of efficiency, sales growth, and removing dated merchandise.
  > 💡 Add missing signature sections, fee notice, and a benefits paragraph to fully meet requirements.

### ❌ `3f821c2d…` — score 4/10
- EOM Inventory and Turn rows are blank, with no working formulas.
- Omni aggregated flow and last-year comparison tables are missing.
- January store receipts are below the $10k minimum requirement.
  > 💡 Complete all calculations with formulas, add omni and LY tables, and adjust receipts to meet constraints.

### ✅ `e996036e…` — score 5/10
- Projected shipment value is incorrect versus stated $225,000 assumption.
- Quarterly sales, shipments, and cash flow timing analysis are missing.
- No visual chart included to compare scenario favorability.
  > 💡 Correct shipment assumptions, add quarterly cash flow modeling, and include a comparison chart in Excel.

### ❌ `6dcae3f5…` — score 4/10
- Did not document or demonstrate use of the provided Key Indicators.xlsx source file.
- Benchmarks are not calculated or reported separately for each PGY year as required.
- ACGME requirement analysis and PGY attainment table are missing entirely.
  > 💡 Rebuild the Excel using the provided source file and add PGY-specific benchmarks and ACGME requirement attainment.

### ❌ `1aecc095…` — score 4/10
- Telehealth Roadmap lacks required Visio-style visual workflow content.
- Telehealth Workflow document appears shorter than required two to three pages.
- Email document is truncated and ends mid-sentence.
  > 💡 Complete the roadmap visual, expand workflow detail, and fix the email length and truncation.

### ❌ `0353ee0c…` — score 3/10
- Document does not list presumptive conditions, exposures, locations, or dates as required.
- Content merely aggregates links instead of consolidating and organizing information from sources.
- PDF is minimal and not exhaustive, contrary to medical director specifications.
  > 💡 Compile explicit presumptive condition lists with service locations and dates extracted from each reference link.

### ❌ `40a8c4b1…` — score 4/10
- Schedule splits sessions into 7–8 and 8–9 instead of single 7–9 grand rounds.
- No evidence holidays were excluded from scheduled Wednesdays.
- In-Service Study Session placement in February is not clearly verified.
  > 💡 Revise the schedule to single 7–9 AM entries per Wednesday and verify required constraints explicitly.

### ❌ `4d1a8410…` — score 3/10
- Interview schedule lacks detailed timed rotations, breaks, lunch placement, and group A/B flow.
- Room-specific breaks and special constraints for Dr. Jones and Dr. Garrett are missing.
- Personal itineraries lack times, tours sequence, and individualized schedules.
  > 💡 Rebuild the schedule with full time blocks, constraints, tours, and mirrored personal itineraries.

### ✅ `8c823e32…` — score 7/10
- Text response summarizes intent instead of presenting the drafted policy content.
- PDF shows repeated header mid-document, suggesting formatting inconsistency.
- Preview does not clearly show prohibited uses and training sections.
  > 💡 Include the full policy text in the response and verify all required sections are clearly labeled and formatted.

### ✅ `11e1b169…` — score 8/10
- KRS 503.090 section lacks specific deadly force criteria and statutory language.
  > 💡 Add brief statutory deadly force conditions and examples directly from KRS 503.090.

### ✅ `a95a5829…` — score 8/10
- Minor typographical truncation in timelines section.
- Excel logging instructions lack specific column and retention details.
  > 💡 Proofread final document and expand Excel tracking instructions with explicit fields and retention standards.

### ✅ `22c0809b…` — score 8/10
- Midwest-specific context and local reporting instructions are minimal.
- No explicit guidance on when submissions are urgent versus routine.
- Page count not clearly labeled within the document.
  > 💡 Add urgency criteria and local contact instructions to improve triage efficiency.

### ✅ `bf68f2ad…` — score 5/10
- Weekly capacity miscalculates 30 hours per day, showing only 60 hours per week.
- Spreadsheet does not model reduced-day schedules after backlog elimination.
- Excel lacks explicit illustration of consequences when reducing days without demand reduction.
  > 💡 Correct capacity calculations and add post-catch-up scenarios showing reduced days and resulting balances.

### ❌ `efca245f…` — score 4/10
- Cumulative open PO tally is missing despite being explicitly required.
- Capacity assumptions are incorrect, including 170 units/day and ignoring 135 upgrade date.
- Truck Grill Guard production and statutory holidays are not scheduled or shown.
  > 💡 Revise scenarios with correct capacities, include grill guard days, holidays, and cumulative PO balances.

### ❌ `9e39df84…` — score 4/10
- Operator Output Data contains extra unnamed columns not specified in requirements.
- Daily outputs for Wednesday and Thursday are missing, breaking weekly calculations.
- Dashboard worksheet lacks required PivotTables, charts, and full KPI details.
  > 💡 Clean the data structure, fully populate Week 1 data, and complete all dashboard analytics and visuals.

### ✅ `68d8d901…` — score 6/10
- Employee counts imply 40 daily staff, conflicting with stated total of 20 personnel.
- No calculation proving batch throughput meets 250,000 lbs within four weeks.
- Dryer staggering details are minimal and not time-offset explicitly.
  > 💡 Align staffing counts to the 20-person team and add throughput and staggered-cycle calculations.

### ✅ `1752cb53…` — score 8/10
- Team members are indicated as counts rather than specific rostered names.
- The response claims calculations but does not summarize validation against weekly labor limits.
  > 💡 Include named operators from the roster and briefly confirm all labor and changeover rules are met.

### ✅ `bd72994f…` — score 7/10
- No luxury brand or collection name is identified anywhere in the deliverables.
- No confirmation the looks come from an official 2025 resort collection source.
  > 💡 Specify a single luxury brand and explicitly reference its official 2025 resort collection throughout.

### ✅ `211d0093…` — score 7/10
- Closing Duties section lacks defined tasks.
- Several tasks are duplicated across different sections.
- Mid-Day section includes end-of-day filing instruction.
  > 💡 Review and refine task sections to remove duplicates and clearly define all closing duties.

### ✅ `d4525420…` — score 8/10
- Text response describes intent instead of providing the requested paragraph.
- Employee name is inconsistently capitalized once in the document.
  > 💡 Ensure the text response directly contains the evaluation paragraph and proofread for consistency.

### ✅ `45c6237b…` — score 6/10
- Presentation exceeds slide limit with 10 pages instead of under 10.
- Shirt quantities are not allocated by size per required historical distribution.
- Next Season Assortment slides lack visible product images from ORDER LIST.pdf.
  > 💡 Reduce slide count, add size-level shirt quantities, and include vendor images on Next Season slides.

### ✅ `cecac8f9…` — score 6/10
- Uses USD currency despite UK store requirement.
- Team launch deck lacks detailed promotional offers and execution specifics.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing delivered content.
  > 💡 Localise metrics to GBP and expand the launch deck with detailed promotions and execution guidance.

### ✅ `8f9e8bcd…` — score 8/10
- Conclusion section appears truncated mid-sentence, reducing professionalism.
  > 💡 Review the document for truncation or formatting errors before final distribution.

### ✅ `0fad6023…` — score 7/10
- No explicit total used versus available inches summary is visible.
- Instructions reference remaining inches not shown in the POG Builder.
- Visual layout is purely tabular without clear end-of-case indicator.
  > 💡 Add clear total, remaining inches fields and a visual case-end marker for clarity.

### ✅ `02314fc6…` — score 7/10
- Checklist lacks corrective action scheduling timelines and responsible parties.
- Submission and review by GM, DM, and LP not stated in checklist.
- PDF content preview appears truncated, risking incomplete information.
  > 💡 Add corrective action timelines, responsible roles, and explicit submission instructions to all reviewers.

### ✅ `4d61a19a…` — score 6/10
- Excel template lacks store sign-off field required by process.
- Template is overly minimal and omits store identifier and instructions.
- No evidence cells are protected to restrict store edits.
  > 💡 Expand and protect the Excel template, adding store ID, sign-off, and clear instructions.

### ✅ `6436ff9e…` — score 7/10
- Typo in section header "Testimoni" instead of "Testimonials".
- Document preview shows truncated or incomplete testimonial section content.
- Explicit testimonial usage permission or consent language is missing.
  > 💡 Proofread the document and complete the testimonials section with clear consent language.

### ✅ `8a7b6fca…` — score 7/10
- Text response states intent rather than summarizing delivered results.
- PDF text formatting is fragmented and reduces readability.
- Visual clarity of decision labels and flows could be improved.
  > 💡 Refine PDF layout and update text response to describe the completed deliverable.

### ✅ `40a99a31…` — score 6/10
- Minimum six cameras not specified or itemized per CNC machine.
- Camera interface GigE Vision not aligned with requested industrial protocols list.
- LIDAR selection lacks zone-by-zone justification for six static areas.
  > 💡 Specify camera quantities per CNC, align interfaces to listed protocols, and justify each LIDAR zone explicitly.

### ✅ `b9665ca1…` — score 6/10
- Text response does not explicitly confirm all specified safety relay pin connections.
- Stop button series versus parallel wiring requirements are not clearly addressed.
- No evidence the schematic uses the exact requested safety relay configuration details.
  > 💡 Explicitly verify and list each required pin, wire label, and E-stop wiring configuration in the description.

### ✅ `c6269101…` — score 6/10
- Text response provides no actual analysis results or conclusions.
- Greatest variability process is not explicitly identified or discussed.
- Capability and stability metrics are not evidenced or summarized.
  > 💡 Include concrete capability findings, stability conclusions, and clearly identify the highest-variability process.

### ✅ `be830ca0…` — score 6/10
- No 1-sample hypothesis test output file is provided.
- Analysis results and statistical conclusions are not documented in the presentation text.
- Reliance on promises of content without verifiable slide-level evidence.
  > 💡 Include the missing hypothesis test output and explicitly document statistical results on the slides.

### ✅ `cd9efc18…` — score 5/10
- PDF length appears far below the required 8–11 pages.
- Execution section lacks confirmed date, witnesses, and notary details.
- Text contains an apparent truncation or typo in the survivorship clause.
  > 💡 Revise the document to correct errors, add execution details, and expand to the required length.

### ✅ `a97369c7…` — score 6/10
- Misstates Moelis decision as Delaware Supreme Court rather than Court of Chancery.
- Characterizes SB 313 as heightened scrutiny despite statutory authorization of stockholder agreements.
- Citations and statutory analysis lack precision in places.
  > 💡 Correct case court attribution and accurately analyze SB 313’s effect on board authority.

### ✅ `3f625cb2…` — score 7/10
- California law discussion may overstate parental consent requirements for mere data collection.
- COPPA lacks a private right of action, which should be clearly emphasized.
- Preview shows truncated text, raising concern about memo completeness.
  > 💡 Clarify legal nuances and verify the PDF is complete and fully accurate.

### ✅ `aad21e4c…` — score 7/10
- Capitalization schedule before and after investment is not clearly included or labeled.
- Scope and detail of minority consent rights cannot be fully verified from the document.
- Anti-dilution top-up mechanics and exempt issuance carve-outs are not clearly specified.
  > 💡 Add a clearly labeled capitalization schedule and explicitly detail anti-dilution and consent right mechanics.

### ✅ `8314d1b1…` — score 8/10
- Memo date is March 2026, which may be inconsistent with engagement timing.
- Text response is meta-descriptive rather than substantive.
- File preview shows truncated citation, raising completeness concern.
  > 💡 Align memo date with engagement timing and ensure all citations and sections are fully presented.

### ✅ `5e2b6aab…` — score 5/10
- STEP files are placeholder stubs, not real manufacturable CAD geometry.
- Response explicitly states lack of real CAD kernel, violating deliverable requirements.
- PDF drawings lack clear balloon callouts tied to BOM items.
  > 💡 Provide fully defined STEP geometry and updated drawings with proper balloons and references.

### ❌ `46fc494e…` — score 3/10
- No actual transient conduction calculations are presented or evidenced.
- Back-face temperatures remain unrealistically constant at 25 C.
- Required 10-minute results and node-specific quantitative data are missing.
  > 💡 Perform and document the full transient thermal calculation and populate plots and tables with computed results.

### ✅ `3940b7e7…` — score 6/10
- Simulation results appear fabricated and not derived from provided CFD data or STEP geometry.
- Field variable table omits required velocity components and detailed pressure definitions.
- Boundary conditions lack quantitative inlet, outlet, and material property values.
  > 💡 Base all results explicitly on supplied CFD outputs and expand tables and boundary condition details.

### ✅ `8077e700…` — score 6/10
- Results table contains NaN time values, indicating improper data extraction.
- AISI 1045 lacks quantitative results, tables, and plots despite task requirements.
- PDF omits explicit time-to-peak hardness comparison between both steels.
  > 💡 Reprocess Data.xlsx to populate valid time values and add full quantitative AISI 1045 analysis with graphs.

### ✅ `5a2d70da…` — score 6/10
- Master tool list lacks required subtotal and post-tax grand total.
- Purchase links are placeholders, not valid supplier pages.
- Sales tax for Suffolk County is not calculated or shown.
  > 💡 Add real supplier links and include pre-tax subtotal and Suffolk County tax calculations.

### ✅ `74d6e8b0…` — score 8/10
- Citations are not visible in the provided preview for verification.
- International guideline sources are not explicitly named in the visible sections.
  > 💡 Add clearly labeled reference citations and a summarized sources table for faster clinician review.

### ✅ `81db15ff…` — score 7/10
- Pennsylvania NP chart signature requirement appears inaccurate.
- Some PA chart signature requirements are oversimplified by state.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing findings.
  > 💡 Verify state-specific scope and documentation rules and add a concise findings summary in the text response.

### ✅ `61b0946a…` — score 6/10
- Relies on a Cadaver Budget.xlsx that was never provided in the original task.
- Does not address scheduling constraints like 3-hour thaw window and 4 cadavers.
- Assumes additional departments without justification from the original task.
  > 💡 Align proposal strictly to provided constraints and avoid introducing unsupported files or assumptions.

### ✅ `61e7b9c6…` — score 5/10
- Medication miscategorized: Vivelle-Dot estradiol patch listed under progesterone oral group.
- Common off-label menopause therapies appear incomplete or missing.
- Estimated prices lack specific online pharmacy source citations.
  > 💡 Correct categorization errors, expand off-label therapies, and cite GoodRx or similar sources for pricing.

### ✅ `c9bf9801…` — score 7/10
- Credits section does not acknowledge NCIPC Mentoring Program inspiration.
- No evidence of CDC branding elements or logo usage in guide.
- Links to separate Word templates are not clearly embedded.
  > 💡 Add a credits section, embed document hyperlinks, and apply CDC branding elements.

### ❌ `f1be6436…` — score 4/10
- Uses estimates instead of real-time screenshots and verified registration, flight, and lodging costs.
- Missing required breakdown of departmental coverage versus physician discretionary fund amounts.
- Travel details ignore Dr. Doe’s early departure and lack specific dates, times, and routes.
  > 💡 Recreate the document using live bookings, full itemization, screenshots with dates, and proper cost allocations.

### ✅ `41f6ef59…` — score 8/10
- Spreadsheet lacks visible dropdowns or checkboxes for Yes/No fields.
- Efficiency formatting features are not clearly demonstrated in the spreadsheet.
  > 💡 Add data validation dropdowns or checkboxes to status columns to improve usability.

### ❌ `6d2c8e55…` — score 4/10
- Journal club dates, rooms, and weekday preferences are not explicitly selected or documented.
- Room availability file shows no added journal club bookings.
- Holiday and conference date avoidance is not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Explicitly select compliant dates and rooms, document bookings in the Excel file, and confirm holiday avoidance.

### ✅ `4b98ccce…` — score 6/10
- Excel sheets lack required signature with name and employee ID.
- Letters do not demonstrate inclusion of provided HIPAA clauses.
- Use of Letter Template Sheet content is not evidenced.
  > 💡 Add signed identifiers to Excel sheets and explicitly incorporate required clauses and template content in letters.

### ✅ `60221cd0…` — score 7/10
- Incorrectly states only party-affiliated voters may vote in primaries.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing completed work.
- Word count is not explicitly verified within the deliverable.
  > 💡 Correct the primary voting description and confirm compliance details directly in the final article.

### ✅ `ef8719da…` — score 6/10
- Background resources list lacks explicit clickable URLs as required.
- One reference entry appears truncated or incomplete.
- Text response describes deliverable instead of presenting pitch content directly.
  > 💡 Add full hyperlinks, fix truncated references, and include the pitch text in the response.

### ✅ `3baa0009…` — score 7/10
- Article does not state or explain negative global growth as required.
- Forecast language describes slower growth rather than contraction.
- Word count compliance is unclear from the provided DOCX preview.
  > 💡 Explicitly address negative global growth and verify word count meets the 300–500 requirement.

### ✅ `5d0feb24…` — score 6/10
- Supporting links to sources and arXiv findings are largely absent.
- Feedback shows limited engagement with the specific study’s novel methods and results.
- Editorial comments are repetitive and sometimes lack actionable rewrite guidance.
  > 💡 Incorporate explicit citations and concrete, paper-specific edits tied to the study’s key findings.

### ✅ `6974adea…` — score 8/10
- Exact word count between 1,000 and 1,500 words is not explicitly confirmed.
  > 💡 Add a final word count check to explicitly confirm compliance with length requirements.

### ✅ `1a78e076…` — score 5/10
- Document appears significantly shorter than required 10–15 pages.
- Quantitative prevalence, morbidity, mortality, and financial impact data are insufficient.
- References section completeness and total count cannot be verified.
  > 💡 Expand content length with detailed data analysis, tables, and a complete referenced synthesis to meet requirements.

### ✅ `1b9ec237…` — score 6/10
- Slide content not reviewed to verify all required topics are included.
- Cannot confirm slide count is within the 20-slide limit.
- Presence and quality of speaker notes and references unverified.
  > 💡 Review the PPTX content to confirm all requirements, accuracy, and slide limits are fully met.

### ✅ `0112fc9b…` — score 8/10
- Follow-up plan sentence appears incomplete in the document.
- Return-to-school and driving guidance after concussion not documented.
  > 💡 Complete the follow-up section and add clear activity, school, and driving restrictions.

### ✅ `772e7524…` — score 8/10
- Plan lacks specific antibiotic name, dose, and duration.
- Assessment omits severity scoring or disposition rationale despite hypoxia.
- ROS and health maintenance elements are minimally documented.
  > 💡 Add guideline-based antibiotic regimen with dosing and include severity assessment to justify outpatient management.

### ✅ `e6429658…` — score 7/10
- Appeal letter appears shorter than the required 2–4 pages.
- Appeal letter content preview appears truncated and may be incomplete.
- AbbVie application was recreated rather than directly filling the official PDF form.
  > 💡 Expand the appeal letter to full length and complete all documents using required official formats.

### ✅ `b5d2e6f1…` — score 7/10
- Data tab contains raw data, not a pivot table as requested.
- Sales by Store tab content was not clearly validated in the preview.
- Sell-through percentages are not explicitly shown as calculated per WTD, MTD, and YTD formulas.
  > 💡 Convert Data into a pivot source, verify Sales by Store columns, and explicitly calculate ST% per period.

### ✅ `f841ddcf…` — score 8/10
- Percent Shipped column is numeric, not formatted as a percentage.
- Filterability as Excel tables is not explicitly confirmed.

### ✅ `47ef842d…` — score 8/10
- Percent Stores Out of Stock values mix decimal and percentage scales inconsistently.
- Text response describes deliverables but provides no actual analytical insights.
- Graph content cannot be verified from the written response alone.
  > 💡 Standardize percentage formatting and add a brief written interpretation of key out-of-stock risks.

### ✅ `1137e2bb…` — score 8/10
- No explicit pivot table demonstrating drill-down to PO level is shown.
- Text response describes intended deliverables rather than summarizing actual findings.
  > 💡 Add a pivot table with enabled drill-down and briefly summarize key SKU error drivers in the text response.

### ✅ `c3525d4d…` — score 7/10
- Removed stores between original and final lists are not identified.
- No explicit confirmation of specific stores like 4099 or 3737.
- Final store tab shows only new stores, not full comparison.
  > 💡 Add a comparison tab listing added and removed stores with explicit store number confirmation.

### ✅ `9a0d8d36…` — score 6/10
- Text response is descriptive but does not show any actual calculations or tax examples.
- Cannot verify slides include step-by-step hypothetical numbers as required.
- Tax treatment of proceeds from exercise versus sale may be unclear.
  > 💡 Include explicit numerical examples and clearly separate exercise taxes from sale proceeds treatment.

### ✅ `664a42e5…` — score 6/10
- Slide content cannot be verified due to unsupported preview.
- 2025 gift tax exclusion Crummey timing not explicitly confirmed.
- Side-by-side ILIT inclusion comparison not independently validated.
  > 💡 Include a slide-by-slide outline or export to PDF for content verification.

### ✅ `feb5eefc…` — score 8/10
- Text response is meta-level and does not summarize findings or recommendation.
- PDF page count compliance with 12-page limit is not explicitly stated.
- Preview does not clearly show a final comparative recommendation section.
  > 💡 Add an executive summary in the text response and explicitly confirm page count and final recommendation.

### ✅ `3600de06…` — score 7/10
- Slide count not verified against required ten slides.
- No visible confirmation of explicit FINRA and NAIC source citations in slides.
- Content alignment cannot be validated without slide preview.
  > 💡 Provide a brief slide-by-slide outline with cited sources to confirm requirements are fully met.

### ✅ `c657103b…` — score 7/10
- Presentation does not confirm use of the specified business digital tunnel template.
- Excel lacks explicit calculation and summary of total tax savings.
- Roth conversion tax impact during conversion years is not shown.
  > 💡 Add conversion-year tax calculations, a tax-savings summary, and confirm the required presentation template.

### ✅ `ae0c1093…` — score 8/10
- Observation form content was not fully previewed to confirm required handwritten lines.
  > 💡 Include a brief preview or excerpt of the observation form to verify required line formatting.

### ✅ `f9f82549…` — score 7/10
- PowerPoint files do not clearly evidence inclusion of specific anonymized incident details.
- An extra flowchart PowerPoint was produced beyond stated requirements.
- Text response describes intent rather than confirming completed deliverables.
  > 💡 Explicitly document anonymized incident facts within each PowerPoint and remove unnecessary files.

### ✅ `57b2cdf2…` — score 8/10
- Surveillance termination time exceeds authorized period without explanation.
- Duration at Hillcrest Road is miscalculated by approximately two minutes.
- Start time notes 7:25 p.m. instead of stated 7:30 p.m. courtesy start.
  > 💡 Clarify authorization variances and correct minor timing inconsistencies for precision.

### ✅ `84322284…` — score 8/10
- Client name inconsistent between task brief and report files.
- Text response summarizes intent rather than substantive findings.
- Minor truncation and incomplete sentence visible in preview.
  > 💡 Standardize client naming and include a brief executive summary in the text response.

### ✅ `a46d5cd2…` — score 7/10
- Photographic evidence section lacks embedded photographs.
- Investigator A surveillance duration and dates insufficiently detailed.
- Physical therapy frequency not fully documented.
  > 💡 Embed photographs and expand surveillance details to fully meet client requirements.

### ❌ `6241e678…` — score 4/10
- Schedule cells are empty with no dates or durations applied.
- Color-coding for phases and client tasks is not visible or implemented.
- Client review durations and revision rounds are not clearly scheduled.
  > 💡 Populate dates with colored bars showing durations and clearly mark client review and revision periods.

### ✅ `e14e32ba…` — score 6/10
- Business hours and full street addresses are missing for all locations.
- Image links point to websites, not actual photos of establishments.
- At least one restaurant section appears incomplete or truncated.
  > 💡 Add complete addresses, hours, proper photo links, and finalize all restaurant sections.

### ✅ `b1a79ce1…` — score 7/10
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing delivered moodboard content.
- Color palette is not explicitly described in the text response.
- CONFIDENCE tag is unnecessary and unprofessional.
  > 💡 Add a brief summary of the moodboard’s color palette and key visual references.

### ✅ `e4f664ea…` — score 5/10
- Script length is only three pages, not the required eight to twelve.
- Final screenplay does not reach the required 10–15 scene target.
- Text response promises deliverables but does not describe story or creative execution.
  > 💡 Expand the screenplay to full length with additional scenes while maintaining proper formatting and visual storytelling.

### ✅ `a079d38f…` — score 8/10
- Administration fee included without being requested in the original task.
- Time estimate is implied but not clearly summarized as total project hours.
- Use of provided rate card and video list is not explicitly referenced.
  > 💡 Add a brief assumptions note clarifying sources, total hours, and justification for any additional fees.

### ❌ `02aa1805…` — score 3/10
- No Illinois EPA data were pulled or reviewed; files contain only empty templates.
- Excel lacks populated well data and does not identify or highlight viable wells.
- Email provides no recommendations or analysis of top well options.
  > 💡 Populate the Excel with actual IEPA well data and provide data-driven recommendations in the email.

### ✅ `fd6129bd…` — score 6/10
- SOP appears incomplete or truncated in approval logic and fast-track description.
- Change Request Form is not completed; all fields are blank.
- Form lacks signatures, dates, and tracking fields for audit readiness.
  > 💡 Complete missing SOP sections and provide a fully filled, audit-ready Change Request Form.

### ✅ `ce864f41…` — score 6/10
- Text response lacks actual answers to the three executive questions.
- Individual utilization data contains missing department and capacity values.
- Wrike Transition Initiative lacks March budget, preventing complete variance analysis.
  > 💡 Fill missing data, add the missing project budget, and include concise written answers summarizing findings.

### ✅ `58ac1cc5…` — score 8/10
- Change control did not demonstrate use of the specified attached blank form.
- QA escalation email content was not shown for verification.
- Risk assessment preview appears truncated, limiting full content confirmation.

### ✅ `3c19c6d1…` — score 5/10
- Claims use of reference documents that were not provided in the task.
- Progress summary references tabular data that is not evidenced.
- Slide compliance cannot be verified from the text response alone.
  > 💡 Explicitly align slide content to stated requirements and avoid citing unavailable source documents.

### ✅ `a99d85fc…` — score 7/10
- Notes section below the Annual Rent Matrix is missing.
- Suite number is shown as a column header rather than a clearly editable variable cell.
- Color-coding and editable light-blue input cells are not verifiable from the file content.
  > 💡 Add a clear Notes section, reposition suite number as an input cell, and ensure visible color-coding.

### ✅ `55ddb773…` — score 5/10
- Document contains typographical artifacts and inconsistent formatting.
- Qualifying questions are generic placeholders, not explicit per violation.
- Architectural regulations section appears incomplete and inconsistently structured.
  > 💡 Clean formatting, remove artifacts, and explicitly list all violation questions exactly as required.

### ❌ `1e5a1d7f…` — score 3/10
- The .docx file lacks the required table with four specified columns.
- No actual weekly schedule tasks or time-based entries are provided.
- PM duties are not demonstrated or referenced in the document content.
  > 💡 Add a complete table with times, activities, detailed tasks, and week-of-month alignment based on PM duties.

### ✅ `0419f1c3…` — score 9/10
- Acknowledgement-time performance gap lacks a quantified baseline metric from the work order data.
  > 💡 Add a specific acknowledgement-time KPI baseline from the portal log to strengthen data completeness.

### ✅ `ed2bc14c…` — score 8/10
- Exit survey analysis lacks percentage context for departure reasons.
  > 💡 Add simple percentages or a small table to strengthen the data-driven analysis.

### ✅ `46bc7238…` — score 6/10
- One-page flyer template example is missing from the PDF.
- Next Steps section is not included in the playbook.
- Cold call and email scripts are overly brief and contain placeholders.
  > 💡 Add a dedicated flyer page, a clear Next Steps section, and expand scripts with actionable detail.

### ✅ `fd3ad420…` — score 8/10
- Commission splits lack specific percentages or ranges.
- State-specific regulatory differences for FL, GA, and NC are not addressed.
  > 💡 Add percentage ranges and brief state-specific compliance notes to strengthen clarity and usability.

### ❌ `0818571f…` — score 4/10
- Did not source active June 2025 listings from Crexi or LoopNet.
- All properties are illustrative placeholders, not real acquisition opportunities.
- Photos and maps are missing actual imagery and location data.
  > 💡 Replace illustrative examples with verified active listings including real photos, maps, and broker-sourced data.

### ❌ `6074bba3…` — score 3/10
- PDF contains extensive placeholder text instead of completed CMA data.
- Comparable sales and active listings are not populated with real market data.
- Graphs and pricing statistics are referenced but not actually inserted.
  > 💡 Fully populate the CMA template with real comps, active listings, completed graphs, and finalized pricing analysis.

### ✅ `5ad0c554…` — score 6/10
- Brochure does not explicitly identify or reference specific items from the 132 Things REALTORS Do list.
- Visual is provided separately but not shown embedded within the Word brochure.
- Double-sided layout is implied but not clearly demonstrated as front and back pages.
  > 💡 Explicitly cite numbered items from the 132 Things list, embed the visual in the brochure, and format clearly as two pages.

### ❌ `11593a50…` — score 3/10
- Properties are fictional and located in wrong city and zip code.
- Weekend tour PDF exceeds two pages and lacks property photos.
- Home count equals 15, violating the less-than-15 requirement.
  > 💡 Use real MLSLI listings in Massapequa Park 11762 and rebuild compliant two-page and map PDFs.

### ✅ `94925f49…` — score 7/10
- Home listings are generic examples without addresses, MLS links, or verifiable details.
- Academic statistics are vague and lack concrete quantitative performance metrics.
- Reports rely on representative snapshots instead of clearly cited, school-specific source data.
  > 💡 Include verified addresses, MLS references, and clearer quantitative school metrics with explicit citations.

### ✅ `90f37ff3…` — score 6/10
- Comparable listings lack dates to confirm three-year timeframe.
- Market data sources like LoopNet or Crexi are not cited.
- DOCX market rent survey section is largely incomplete.
  > 💡 Add dated, sourced comparable data with full addresses and align recommendation ranges consistently.

### ✅ `403b9234…` — score 6/10
- Cannot verify slide count or required content without PPT preview.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing actual slide content.
- Minor grammatical error: 'an 9-slide' should be 'a 9-slide'.
  > 💡 Include a brief slide outline with slide count to confirm all requirements are met.

### ✅ `1bff4551…` — score 6/10
- Includes a non–African American act, violating the core program focus.
- Does not clearly verify artists are represented in the Institute's collection.
- Justification for lineage-based inclusion conflicts with stated song selection criteria.
  > 💡 Replace non-qualifying songs with African American rock artists verified in the Institute collection.

### ✅ `650adcb1…` — score 6/10
- Sixth tab listing interns’ time off requests is missing.
- No clear notation of dates lacking two interns scheduled.
- Coverage compliance with five-on two-off rule is not validated.
  > 💡 Add a dedicated time-off tab and a coverage summary highlighting understaffed dates.

### ✅ `01d7e53e…` — score 7/10
- Primary contacts lack specific names, phone numbers, and email addresses.
- Applicable requirements section appears incomplete or placeholder text.
- Referenced attachment or exhibit content is not clearly included.
  > 💡 Add complete contact details, insert full standard clauses verbatim, and include all referenced exhibits.

### ✅ `a73fbc98…` — score 5/10
- No evidence vendors selling similar goods were separated to ensure variety.
- Electricity needs were recorded but not used to guide table placement.
- Arena and meeting room table numbering overlaps, creating potential setup confusion.
  > 💡 Revise assignments to reflect product variety spacing, electrical access, and distinct table numbering per space.

### ✅ `0ec25916…` — score 5/10
- PDF is two pages, not the required single page.
- DOCX file lacks the SBAR table and detailed content.
- Table structure does not clearly show two columns by four rows.
  > 💡 Condense content into a single-page, clearly defined SBAR table and update both PDF and DOCX consistently.

### ✅ `116e791e…` — score 7/10
- PDF is two pages instead of the required one page.
- One-page formatting requirement was not met despite correct content.
  > 💡 Condense layout and formatting so all care plan content fits on a single PDF page.

### ❌ `dd724c67…` — score 3/10
- Facility list contains placeholders, not researched Long Island hospitals and rehabilitation facilities.
- TFU reference lacks condition-specific timeframes from CMS ACO REACH PY 2025.
- Deliverable explicitly states content requires validation, failing professional completeness.
  > 💡 Conduct actual online research and populate verified facility data and CMS-sourced TFU specifications.

### ❌ `7151c60a…` — score 4/10
- Patient pre-screening checklist lacks required table with patient information elements.
- Checklist missing patient name and date of birth fields on each page.
- Company logo is not visible on either document.
  > 💡 Revise both Word documents to include all specified fields, tables, logos, and formatting requirements.

### ❌ `90edba97…` — score 3/10
- Monthly lab numeric values were not entered despite task requiring full data entry.
- Medication and treatment changes were not documented per standing order protocols.
- MRNs and monthly results are missing or blank across tracker sheets.
  > 💡 Request complete Patient Lab Reports and redo the tracker with full monthly labs and protocol-based actions.

### ✅ `91060ff0…` — score 6/10
- No references or citations are included despite requirement for source-based accuracy.
- Poster appears text-heavy with no clear visuals, tables, or product comparisons.
- OTC treatment section lacks safety warnings and age-specific considerations.
  > 💡 Add cited references, clear visuals or tables, and expand OTC guidance with safety and age considerations.

### ✅ `8384083a…` — score 6/10
- Miebo days’ supply calculation is incorrect for QID both-eye dosing.
- Miebo drop-count assumptions per mL are missing, leading to wrong billing.
- Table formatting splits NDCs and headers, reducing clarity.
  > 💡 Recalculate Miebo using drops-per-mL to correct days’ supply and clean up table formatting.

### ✅ `045aba2e…` — score 8/10
- Checklists lack explicit citations to specific California law sections.
- Some high-risk compliance areas appear insufficiently detailed.
- Documents lack version control, effective date, and review signature lines.
  > 💡 Add regulatory citations, expand high-risk items, and include versioning and sign-off fields.

### ❌ `f2986c1f…` — score 3/10
- Medications were not identified from the image as required.
- Spreadsheet contains only placeholder NA values.
- Drugs.com and MedlinePlus links were not provided.
  > 💡 Identify medications from the image using Drugs.com and populate all available fields with real data.

### ❌ `ffed32d8…` — score 2/10
- Report lacks required comparative table with drug-level cost and reimbursement data.
- All revenue values are $0.00, indicating no actual calculations were performed.
- Analysis does not reference or use Wholesale Price or Reimbursement PDFs.
  > 💡 Recalculate revenues using provided PDFs and present a complete drug-level comparison table with justified totals.

### ✅ `b3573f20…` — score 6/10
- PDF is five pages instead of the required three pages.
- Generated output description does not match the actual PDF length.
  > 💡 Condense content or adjust pagination to deliver an exact three-page PDF.

### ✅ `a69be28f…` — score 8/10
- Text response is high-level and omits specific regional or fit performance insights.
  > 💡 Add a brief written summary highlighting key winning fits by region and gender.

### ✅ `788d2bc6…` — score 8/10
- No explicit confirmation of alignment with SERVICESV5.docx content.
- Preview does not visibly demonstrate TikTok influencer and review generation slides.
  > 💡 Add a brief appendix or note confirming SERVICESV5.docx alignment and highlighting TikTok influencer and review services.

### ✅ `74ed1dc7…` — score 9/10
- Renaming existing Bulk order type may conflict with requirement to add types in addition.
  > 💡 Clarify governance and implementation steps for approving and deploying new order types.

### ✅ `69a8ef86…` — score 9/10
- External guidelines do not reference SPS or EDI return communication flows.
  > 💡 Add a brief section describing SPS/EDI usage for RA requests and return notifications.

### ✅ `ab81b076…` — score 8/10
- Visual examples lack annotations or callouts explaining damage documentation steps.
- Communication steps with parts distribution center are high-level and lack contact details.
- No defined timing standards or SLAs for system confirmation and discrepancy reporting.
  > 💡 Add annotated visuals, explicit PDC contact methods, and timing expectations to strengthen usability.

### ❌ `d7cfae6f…` — score 4/10
- Projected sales timeframe references Q1 2023 instead of future Q1 2024.
- Axis labeling contains errors and inconsistencies, including an invalid "Axe" entry.
- Total available inventory and totals rows contain zeros or incorrect aggregations.
  > 💡 Correct timeframe logic, clean axis labels, and recompute inventory totals and projections accurately.

### ❌ `19403010…` — score 3/10
- Sections 3–5 function-level tables with nine required columns are missing.
- Excel layout lacks clearly labeled five sections on a single recap page.
- Function rankings, totals, and discontinued metrics by function are not shown.
  > 💡 Rebuild the recap to include all five sections with complete function-level tables and required calculations.

### ✅ `7ed932dd…` — score 6/10
- Excel file lacks visible highlighting for added pallets and earlier delivery rows.
- Model does not demonstrate inventory coverage through end of July.
- No comparison to current shipment schedule to flag earlier delivery needs.
  > 💡 Add visual highlights and extend calculations to explicitly cover inventory through July 31.

### ✅ `105f8ad0…` — score 5/10
- No documented competitor research or sources from Macy’s, Ulta, or Sephora.
- Uses proxy averages instead of actual September 2025 MSRPs.
- Concentration pricing logic inconsistent; Elixir recommended below EDP in same size.
  > 💡 Redo the model using real competitor MSRPs with cited sources and validate concentration-based pricing logic.

### ❌ `b57efde3…` — score 3/10
- Prospecting list is empty and contains no identified companies.
- Task required reviewing exhibitor portfolios, which was not performed.
- Deliverable is a template, not a completed prospecting list.
  > 💡 Populate the spreadsheet with vetted Aqua Nor exhibitors offering AUVs, ROVs, or underwater cameras.

### ❌ `15d37511…` — score 4/10
- Annual consumables pricing, quantities, and gross margin are completely missing.
- Tiered pricing for volumes above and below 1,000 units is not shown or applied.
- Volume assumption uses 2,000 units per product instead of clarifying total versus per-product.
  > 💡 Revise the spreadsheet to include consumables, tiered pricing logic, and clarified volume assumptions with updated totals.

### ✅ `bb863dd9…` — score 7/10
- WHO documentation link is not included in the quotation file.
- Overall quotation total amount is not clearly summarized.
- Compliance with internal pricing reference is not explicitly cited.
  > 💡 Add a WHO reference link and a clear grand total section to the quotation.

### ✅ `fe0d3941…` — score 7/10
- Survey does not address requirement of distribution to over a hundred people.
- Extra DOCX file delivered though only PDF survey was requested.
- PowerPoint content cannot be verified for required legend and benefits slides.
  > 💡 Clarify survey deployment plan and ensure only requested files with verified slide content are delivered.

### ❌ `6a900a40…` — score 4/10
- Transport options with freight costs and grand totals are missing below Total EXW.
- Item remarks lack transit times and suitability reasoning for each transport mode.
- Delivery time and unit price do not clearly match internal reference table.
  > 💡 Revise the Excel file to fully populate transport sections, remarks, and pricing per provided references.

### ✅ `9efbcd35…` — score 8/10
- MSCI performance figures are qualitative without specific index return percentages.
- No explicit citations to WSJ, FT, or named research sources are included.
- Minor truncation or typo appears in the Brazil section text.
  > 💡 Add specific MSCI return data and brief source citations to strengthen credibility.

### ✅ `1d4672c8…` — score 6/10
- Historical data is simulated, not extracted from MSCI as explicitly required.
- Requirement to source returns directly from MSCI’s website is unmet.
- Extra DOCX file produced was not requested in the task.
  > 💡 Replace simulated data with MSCI-sourced returns and regenerate Excel and PDF deliverables.

### ✅ `4de6a529…` — score 6/10
- Change indicators use inconsistent symbols instead of clear up/down arrows.
- Several rationales and conviction labels are awkwardly line-broken or truncated.
- Tables lack consistent visual alignment for UW/N/OW indicators.
  > 💡 Standardize table formatting, arrow notation, and text wrapping to improve clarity and professionalism.

### ✅ `4c4dc603…` — score 6/10
- PDF is two pages, not the required one-page summary.
- Salient numbers like target raise, IRR, and token price are missing or unspecified.
- Key team member profiles lack names, roles, and credentials.
  > 💡 Condense to one page and add concrete financial metrics and named team profiles.

### ✅ `bb499d9c…` — score 7/10
- Process lacks detailed step-by-step guidance expected for Level 1 sales operations.
- CEO brief and external industry best-practice research are not explicitly referenced or cited.
- Process models and role definitions appear high-level with limited issuer and investor customization.

### ✅ `5349dd7b…` — score 6/10
- Historical rate increases were assumed, not researched via search engines as required.
- Flat rate definitions for FedEx and UPS may not reflect true published business flat-rate offerings.
- Source citations and methodology transparency are missing from the deliverable.
  > 💡 Revalidate all rates and increases with cited sources and confirm carrier-specific flat-rate program definitions.

### ✅ `a4a9195c…` — score 8/10
- No explicit page length confirmation or table of contents included.
- Humidity control and grounding verification procedures are not addressed.
  > 💡 Add environmental controls, grounding checks, and a brief revision history section.

### ✅ `552b7dd0…` — score 6/10
- Text response is generic and lacks concrete findings or metrics.
- No verifiable evidence of total cost and resolution time statistics.
- Summary slide takeaways and recommendations are not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Include explicit key metrics and clearly stated insights and recommendations in the presentation.

### ❌ `76418a2c…` — score 3/10
- Manifest missing required headers and fields like customer, weight, costs, savings.
- Pick ticket data not populated; most rows blank and ticket numbers absent.
- Shipping methods and costs not traceable to provided parameters or industry averages.
  > 💡 Rebuild the manifest using source files, correct columns, and fully populate all orders.

### ❌ `0e386e32…` — score 3/10
- ZIP size indicates missing or placeholder content.
- No evidence of frontend, smart contracts, or integrations implemented.
- Output promises full codebase but provides unverifiable scaffold.
  > 💡 Provide a complete, populated project with actual source files and documentation.

### ❌ `7de33b48…` — score 4/10
- Zip contents cannot be verified or inspected for required files.
- No evidence the utility, tests, or WCAG checks are actually implemented.
- Original task file list is incomplete and unresolved.
  > 💡 Provide a verifiable zip with visible source files, tests, and clear file structure.

### ✅ `4122f866…` — score 5/10
- No evidence SES domain identity, DKIM, and MAIL FROM records are defined.
- API Gateway stage versioning and POST route configuration not demonstrated.
- README lacks reCAPTCHA setup details and request payload schema.
  > 💡 Include explicit Terraform and README details proving all required AWS resources and behaviors.

### ✅ `2c249e0f…` — score 7/10
- API lacks explicit multipart upload or byte-range resume semantics.
- Deferred payload uploads via SSD or monthly batching are not modeled.
- Processing pipeline triggering is described but minimally specified in API.
  > 💡 Add explicit multipart upload endpoints and clearer payload deferral and processing trigger APIs.

## Failure Analysis

The clearest hard-failure pattern is brittle schema handling in code-driven tabular tasks. Five of the six errors were not domain-reasoning failures but unguarded assumptions about workbook headers or sheet structure: 87da214f-fd92-4c58-9854-f4d0d10adce0 failed on a missing Amount Reimbursed column, 5f6c57dd-feb6-4e70-b152-4969d92d1608 on Branch, 327fbc21-7d26-4964-bf7c-f4f41e55c54d on an absent ACTIVE column, a0552909-bc66-4a3a-8970-ee0d17b49718 on Lab Name, and 11dcc268-cb07-4d3a-a184-c6d7a19349bc on missing inventory field names. The sixth failure, 854f3814-681c-4950-91ac-55b0db0e3781, was a code-assembly defect: an unterminated triple-quoted string. This points to a narrow but important operational weakness: once tasks require attachment parsing, the pipeline is too brittle to variation in schema and formatting.

Among nominally successful tasks, the dominant low-QA pattern is completion without fulfillment: the model produces a polished narrative, template, or placeholder workbook instead of a populated deliverable. Examples include 7b08cd4d-df60-41ae-9102-8aaa49306ba2 with zeroed P&L sheets, 43dc9778-450b-4b46-b77e-b6d82b202035 with a narrative Form 1040 instead of the actual form, 24d1e93f-9018-45d4-b522-ad89dfd78079 with empty NPV sheets, 02aa1805-c658-4069-8a6a-02dec146063a with empty well-screening templates, dd724c67-8118-4b99-ab50-4761af705c3b with placeholder discharge facilities, and a10ec48c-168e-476c-8fe3-23b2a5f616ac / 0818571f-5ff7-4d39-9d2c-ced5ae44299e / 11593a50-734d-4449-b5b4-f8986a133fd8 with missing or fictional live-data research. By contrast, bounded policy, memo, and checklist work with less external data dependence performed well, such as 36d567ba-e205-4313-9756-931c6e4691fe, dfb4e0cd-a0b7-454e-b943-0dd586c2764c, eb54f575-93f9-408b-b9e0-f1208a0b6759, a0ef404e-82a6-4507-bff1-633d7c8e0004, and d3d255b2-f5f2-4841-9f62-2083ec9ef3da. The failure mode is therefore not general writing ability; it is exact population of required fields, calculations, and source-grounded facts.

A separate cluster appears in artifact-heavy deliverables where the model substitutes planning collateral for the required final asset. In Information, film/video tasks repeatedly delivered packages without the actual export: e222075d-5d62-4757-ae3c-e34b0846583b missed the 30-second MP4, c94452e4-39cd-4846-b73a-ab75933d1ad7 missed the 15-second commercial, 75401f7c-396d-406d-b08e-938874ad1045 missed the showreel file, and a941b6d8-4289-4500-b45a-f8e4fc94a724 documented VFX work without producing video. The same pattern extends to engineering and software: 5e2b6aab-f9fb-4dd6-a1a5-874ef1743909 shipped STEP stubs rather than real CAD, 0e386e32-df20-4d1f-b536-7159bc409ad5 provided a scaffold ZIP rather than an implemented codebase, and 7de33b48-5163-4f50-b5f3-8deea8185e57 / 4122f866-01fa-400b-904d-fa171cdab7c7 lacked verifiable source artifacts or required infrastructure details. These are not isolated misses; they suggest the current setup defaults to surrogate documentation whenever the benchmark expects a finished binary, media, CAD, or executable artifact.

Sector and retry patterns reinforce those themes. The weakest sectors by self-QA were Health Care and Social Assistance and Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services, both at 5.4, and many of their lowest scores were exacting form, schedule, or source-data tasks such as 6dcae3f5-bf1c-48e0-8b4b-23e6486a934c, 4d1a8410-e9c5-4be5-ab43-cc55563c594c, f1be6436-ffff-4fee-9e66-d550291a1735, 90edba97-74f0-425a-8ff6-8b93182eb7cb, c357f0e2-963d-4eb7-a6fa-3078fe55b3ba, and 7d7fc9a7-21a7-4b83-906f-416dea5ad04f. Information was the slowest sector, but longer runtimes did not improve quality; low-QA tasks like a941b6d8-4289-4500-b45a-f8e4fc94a724, ec2fccc9-b7f6-4c73-bf51-896fdb433cec, and 6241e678-4ba3-4831-b3c7-78412697febc were still slow. Retries improved completion more than correctness: some reruns recovered well, such as 38889c3b-e3d4-49c8-816a-3cc8e5313aba, 1752cb53-5983-46b6-92ee-58ac85a11283, and 94925f49-36bc-42da-b45b-61078d329300, but many retried tasks still scored poorly or failed outright, including 7b08cd4d-df60-41ae-9102-8aaa49306ba2, c94452e4-39cd-4846-b73a-ab75933d1ad7, a941b6d8-4289-4500-b45a-f8e4fc94a724, b39a5aa7-cd1b-47ad-b249-90afd22f8f21, d7cfae6f-4a82-4289-955e-c799dfe1e0f4, and all six hard errors. The practical conclusion is that retries are absorbing transient issues, but they are not correcting bad task decomposition, schema mismatch, or missing artifact validation.

## Recommendations

First, add a schema-first tabular execution layer for every XLSX, CSV, or table-extraction task. Before writing business logic, the agent should enumerate workbook sheets, normalize headers, sample rows, and build a column-alias map using case folding, whitespace stripping, punctuation removal, and fuzzy matching. If a required field is missing, the system should search likely alternatives and emit a diagnostic note instead of crashing. That single change would address the main operational failures in 87da214f-fd92-4c58-9854-f4d0d10adce0, 5f6c57dd-feb6-4e70-b152-4969d92d1608, 327fbc21-7d26-4964-bf7c-f4f41e55c54d, a0552909-bc66-4a3a-8970-ee0d17b49718, and 11dcc268-cb07-4d3a-a184-c6d7a19349bc. Also add guarded dataframe accessors and fail-soft outputs, such as a schema report workbook, rather than terminating with exit code 1.

Second, route tasks by artifact type and match them to the right toolchain. The current configuration is adequate for structured prose and moderate spreadsheets, but it is weak on final-media, CAD, and code-archive deliverables. For video tasks, require file-level validation for presence, codec, duration, and resolution before marking success; this would have caught e222075d-5d62-4757-ae3c-e34b0846583b, c94452e4-39cd-4846-b73a-ab75933d1ad7, 75401f7c-396d-406d-b08e-938874ad1045, and a941b6d8-4289-4500-b45a-f8e4fc94a724. For CAD, validate that STEP files contain real geometry and that drawings reference BOM items, which would have blocked 5e2b6aab-f9fb-4dd6-a1a5-874ef1743909. For software ZIPs, automatically unzip, count source files, run tests or builds, and verify README and infrastructure definitions, which would materially improve 0e386e32-df20-4d1f-b536-7159bc409ad5, 7de33b48-5163-4f50-b5f3-8deea8185e57, and 4122f866-01fa-400b-904d-fa171cdab7c7. If the environment cannot create the final artifact, the planner should switch tools or explicitly refuse surrogate packaging rather than silently substituting documentation.

Third, tighten prompt engineering around evidence and source use. Many low-QA outputs were fluent because the model described what it intended to deliver instead of verifying what it actually populated. Add an internal requirement-to-evidence checklist that forces the agent to map each requested table, field, citation, formula, page limit, and attachment dependency to a concrete location in the output. That would directly improve 43dc9778-450b-4b46-b77e-b6d82b202035, 24d1e93f-9018-45d4-b522-ad89dfd78079, b39a5aa7-cd1b-47ad-b249-90afd22f8f21, 02aa1805-c658-4069-8a6a-02dec146063a, and dd724c67-8118-4b99-ab50-4761af705c3b. For public-data tasks, enable browsing or a search API and explicitly forbid fabricated placeholders; that is the main remediation for a10ec48c-168e-476c-8fe3-23b2a5f616ac, 0818571f-5ff7-4d39-9d2c-ced5ae44299e, 11593a50-734d-4449-b5b4-f8986a133fd8, 8079e27d-b6f3-4f75-a9b5-db27903c798d, and f2986c1f-2bbf-4b83-bc93-624a9d617f45. The prompt should explicitly say: no invented data, no empty summary tabs, no narrative substitutes for official forms.

Fourth, make QA gating and retry policy validator-driven instead of generic. Use stricter auto-hold thresholds for the weaker sectors and deliverable classes already exposed here: healthcare admin, professional services spreadsheets, software archives, and media exports. A practical rule is to escalate any job with self-QA below 6, any detected blank worksheet or all-zero calculation pattern, any missing required artifact, or any page-count/format mismatch. Then retry only with targeted error context, not a blind rerun. That preserves the benefit seen in recoverable retries like 38889c3b-e3d4-49c8-816a-3cc8e5313aba, 1752cb53-5983-46b6-92ee-58ac85a11283, and 94925f49-36bc-42da-b45b-61078d329300, while reducing wasted cycles on persistent logic failures such as 7b08cd4d-df60-41ae-9102-8aaa49306ba2, a941b6d8-4289-4500-b45a-f8e4fc94a724, b39a5aa7-cd1b-47ad-b249-90afd22f8f21, and d7cfae6f-4a82-4289-955e-c799dfe1e0f4. In parallel, keep the current configuration for sectors that already perform strongly on bounded drafting tasks, especially Government and parts of Retail, and reserve higher-reasoning or tool-rich modes for the failure-prone classes above.

## Deliverable Files

- `83d10b06…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `7b08cd4d…` (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): 3 file(s)
- `99ac6944…` (Information): 5 file(s)
- `f9a1c16c…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `38889c3b…` (Information): 6 file(s)
- `ff85ee58…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `4b894ae3…` (Information): 2 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): 11 file(s)
- `75401f7c…` (Information): 3 file(s)
- `a941b6d8…` (Information): 5 file(s)
- `8079e27d…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `e21cd746…` (Finance and Insurance): 3 file(s)
- `9e8607e7…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `c7d83f01…` (Finance and Insurance): 3 file(s)
- `46b34f78…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `a1963a68…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 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)
- `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): 5 file(s)
- `68d8d901…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `1752cb53…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `bd72994f…` (Retail Trade): 3 file(s)
- `211d0093…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `d4525420…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `45c6237b…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `cecac8f9…` (Retail Trade): 5 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): 2 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): 12 file(s)
- `46fc494e…` (Manufacturing): 5 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)
- `f841ddcf…` (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): 8 file(s)
- `57b2cdf2…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `84322284…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `a46d5cd2…` (Retail Trade): 1 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): 2 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): 2 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): 11 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)
- `a73fbc98…` (Government): 2 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): 10 file(s)
- `788d2bc6…` (Wholesale Trade): 7 file(s)
- `74ed1dc7…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `69a8ef86…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `ab81b076…` (Wholesale Trade): 4 file(s)
- `d7cfae6f…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `19403010…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `7ed932dd…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `105f8ad0…` (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): 3 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)
- `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)
