# Experiment Report: GPT-5.2 Chat Elicit v2 — domain packages + package notice (Full 220)

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| **Experiment ID** | `exp011_GPT52Chat_domain_packages` |
| **Condition** | Elicit v2 16k + domain packages |
| **Model** | gpt-5.2-chat |
| **Execution Mode** | subprocess |
| **Date** | 2026-03-05 |
| **Duration** | 158m 25s |
| **Generated At** | 2026-03-05T17:43:52.548033+00:00 |
| 🤗 HF Dataset | [exp011_GPT52Chat_domain_packages](https://huggingface.co/datasets/HyeonSang/exp011_GPT52Chat_domain_packages) |
| 📊 Self-Report | [self_report.json](https://huggingface.co/datasets/HyeonSang/exp011_GPT52Chat_domain_packages/blob/main/self_report.json) |
| 📊 Grading | ⏳ Awaiting (`scores.json`) |

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

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

This run evaluated GPT-5.2 Chat in the Elicit v2 16k configuration with domain packages enabled and a package notice, executed in subprocess mode across 220 tasks. The setup appears intended to test end-to-end task execution and deliverable generation under sector-specific prompt/package conditions rather than single-turn response quality alone.

Task completion was strong: 210 of 220 tasks completed successfully, for a 95.5% task completion rate. There were 10 errors total, and 40 tasks required retry attempts, which suggests the run was operationally robust but not fully stable on first pass. The retry count is notable because it indicates some recovery behavior was needed to maintain overall completion.

LLM-evaluated quality was moderate overall. The average self-assessed confidence / Self-QA score was 6.12/10, with a wide range from 2 to 9. That pattern indicates that while the model usually produced a usable output and associated deliverable file, confidence in completeness and correctness was uneven across tasks. In practical terms, file generation quality looks generally reliable at the presence/production level, but more variable at the content-quality level.

Sector highlights were mixed. Information and Manufacturing achieved full completion at 25/25 each, while Government also performed strongly at 24/25 with the highest average Self-QA score (7.2/10). Wholesale Trade was the weakest sector on completion at 21/25, and Health Care and Social Assistance had one of the lower LLM-evaluated quality profiles despite near-complete execution. Overall, the run shows high completion with mid-band self-assessed confidence rather than uniformly high-confidence outputs.

## Key Metrics

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Total Tasks | 220 |
| Success | 210 (95.5%) |
| Errors | 10 |
| Retried Tasks | 40 |
| Avg QA Score | 6.12/10 |
| Min QA Score | 2/10 |
| Max QA Score | 9/10 |
| Avg Latency | 27,315ms |
| Max Latency | 53,021ms |
| Total LLM Time | 6009s |

## File Generation

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

### Resume Rounds

| Round | Attempted | Recovered | Still Failed |
|-------|-----------|-----------|--------------|
| 1 | 23 | 23 | 0 |
| 2 | 17 | 7 | 10 |

## Quality Analysis

The Self-QA distribution suggests a broad spread in output quality. An average of 6.12/10, combined with a minimum of 2 and maximum of 9, points to frequent mid-confidence deliverables with a smaller number of clearly weak and clearly strong outputs. This is consistent with a system that usually completes the task and generates the requested file artifacts, but with meaningful variation in how complete, specific, or internally reliable those deliverables are judged by the model itself.

At the sector level, Government stood out with the highest LLM-evaluated quality at 7.2/10, and Retail Trade was also relatively strong at 6.7/10. Finance and Insurance (6.1), Real Estate (6.0), and Wholesale Trade (6.2) were near the overall average, while Information, Manufacturing, and Professional/Scientific/Technical Services clustered at 5.8. Health Care and Social Assistance was lowest at 5.6, indicating that successful execution in that sector did not consistently translate into high self-assessed confidence in the final deliverables.

Occupation-specific conclusions are limited by the provided aggregate summary, which reports sector-level rather than occupation-level results. Based on the available data, the main pattern is not a clear occupation effect but a package/sector effect: some sector package contexts produced more confident deliverable files than others even when completion rates were similar. In particular, Information and Manufacturing reached 100% completion but only mid-range Self-QA averages, implying that deliverable file generation was dependable while perceived content quality remained constrained.

Latency does not show a strong positive correlation with quality in this run. Information had the highest average latency at 30059ms but only a 5.8/10 average Self-QA score, while Wholesale Trade had the lowest latency at 22810ms with a slightly better 6.2/10 score. Retail combined relatively low latency (26364ms) with above-average quality (6.7), and Government paired near-overall latency (27542ms) with the best quality. The main takeaway is that longer runtime did not reliably produce higher-confidence outputs; sector/package characteristics appear more predictive than latency alone.

## Sector Breakdown

| Sector | Tasks | Success | Success% | Avg QA | Avg Latency |
|--------|-------|---------|----------|--------|-------------|
| Finance and Insurance | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 6.12/10 | 27,272ms |
| Government | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 7.25/10 | 27,542ms |
| Health Care and Social Assistance | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 5.62/10 | 27,862ms |
| Information | 25 | 25 | 100.0% | 5.8/10 | 30,059ms |
| Manufacturing | 25 | 25 | 100.0% | 5.84/10 | 28,176ms |
| Professional, Scientific, and Technical  | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 5.75/10 | 27,728ms |
| Real Estate and Rental and Leasing | 25 | 24 | 96.0% | 6.0/10 | 27,830ms |
| Retail Trade | 20 | 19 | 95.0% | 6.68/10 | 26,364ms |
| Wholesale Trade | 25 | 21 | 84.0% | 6.19/10 | 22,810ms |

## Task Results

| # | Task ID | Sector | Occupation | Status | Retry | Files | QA Score | Latency |
|---|---------|--------|------------|--------|-------|-------|----------|---------|
| 1 | `83d10b06…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 30793ms |
| 2 | `7b08cd4d…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 24356ms |
| 3 | `7d7fc9a7…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 22345ms |
| 4 | `43dc9778…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 31083ms |
| 5 | `ee09d943…` | Professional, Scientif | Accountants and Au | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 18879ms |
| 6 | `f84ea6ac…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 27854ms |
| 7 | `a328feea…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 16620ms |
| 8 | `27e8912c…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | Yes | 6 | 7/10 | 27848ms |
| 9 | `17111c03…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 3 | 8/10 | 31869ms |
| 10 | `c44e9b62…` | Government | Administrative Ser | ✅ success | - | 4 | 6/10 | 32308ms |
| 11 | `99ac6944…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 5 | 6/10 | 36946ms |
| 12 | `f9a1c16c…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 28877ms |
| 13 | `38889c3b…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 22736ms |
| 14 | `ff85ee58…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 23895ms |
| 15 | `4b894ae3…` | Information | Audio and Video Te | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 20156ms |
| 16 | `1b1ade2d…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 31539ms |
| 17 | `93b336f3…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 29228ms |
| 18 | `15ddd28d…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 34684ms |
| 19 | `24d1e93f…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 28122ms |
| 20 | `05389f78…` | Manufacturing | Buyers and Purchas | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 35603ms |
| 21 | `575f8679…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 35628ms |
| 22 | `a74ead3b…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 26112ms |
| 23 | `bbe0a93b…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 6 | 6/10 | 43160ms |
| 24 | `85d95ce5…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 53021ms |
| 25 | `76d10872…` | Government | Child, Family, and | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 36081ms |
| 26 | `36d567ba…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 23235ms |
| 27 | `7bbfcfe9…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 17997ms |
| 28 | `2696757c…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 20940ms |
| 29 | `dfb4e0cd…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 15506ms |
| 30 | `4c18ebae…` | Government | Compliance Officer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 30545ms |
| 31 | `cebf301e…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 30335ms |
| 32 | `c2e8f271…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 39422ms |
| 33 | `2ea2e5b5…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 5 | 5/10 | 24972ms |
| 34 | `c357f0e2…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 28231ms |
| 35 | `a45bc83b…` | Professional, Scientif | Computer and Infor | ✅ success | - | 4 | 7/10 | 32698ms |
| 36 | `a10ec48c…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 1 | 2/10 | 27129ms |
| 37 | `fccaa4a1…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 38070ms |
| 38 | `f5d428fd…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 9 | 6/10 | 31013ms |
| 39 | `2fa8e956…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 35954ms |
| 40 | `0e4fe8cd…` | Real Estate and Rental | Concierges | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 38017ms |
| 41 | `a0ef404e…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 26432ms |
| 42 | `b7a5912e…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 19770ms |
| 43 | `aa071045…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 18947ms |
| 44 | `476db143…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | - | 4 | 4/10 | 21972ms |
| 45 | `61f546a8…` | Real Estate and Rental | Counter and Rental | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 23891ms |
| 46 | `f3351922…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 20509ms |
| 47 | `61717508…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 4 | 8/10 | 26264ms |
| 48 | `0ed38524…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 4 | 5/10 | 18712ms |
| 49 | `87da214f…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 24477ms |
| 50 | `d025a41c…` | Finance and Insurance | Customer Service R | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 23491ms |
| 51 | `401a07f1…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 30444ms |
| 52 | `afe56d05…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 34079ms |
| 53 | `9a8c8e28…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 6 | 6/10 | 33621ms |
| 54 | `3a4c347c…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 29203ms |
| 55 | `ec2fccc9…` | Information | Editors | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 30186ms |
| 56 | `8c8fc328…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 21296ms |
| 57 | `e222075d…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 5 | 6/10 | 36357ms |
| 58 | `c94452e4…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 4/10 | 26523ms |
| 59 | `75401f7c…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 3 | 3/10 | 26716ms |
| 60 | `a941b6d8…` | Information | Film and Video Edi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 3/10 | 28141ms |
| 61 | `8079e27d…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 25963ms |
| 62 | `e21cd746…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 28299ms |
| 63 | `9e8607e7…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 41466ms |
| 64 | `c7d83f01…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 5 | 4/10 | 46078ms |
| 65 | `46b34f78…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial and Inve | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 30350ms |
| 66 | `a1963a68…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 26015ms |
| 67 | `5f6c57dd…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 20445ms |
| 68 | `b39a5aa7…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 5/10 | 20025ms |
| 69 | `b78fd844…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 33852ms |
| 70 | `4520f882…` | Finance and Insurance | Financial Managers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 24547ms |
| 71 | `ec591973…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 13282ms |
| 72 | `62f04c2f…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 19434ms |
| 73 | `3f821c2d…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 21154ms |
| 74 | `e996036e…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 26973ms |
| 75 | `327fbc21…` | Wholesale Trade | First-Line Supervi | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 28252ms |
| 76 | `6dcae3f5…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 4/10 | 33617ms |
| 77 | `1aecc095…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 32733ms |
| 78 | `0353ee0c…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 2/10 | 31850ms |
| 79 | `40a8c4b1…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 30976ms |
| 80 | `4d1a8410…` | Health Care and Social | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 3/10 | 24271ms |
| 81 | `8c823e32…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 27748ms |
| 82 | `eb54f575…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 27603ms |
| 83 | `11e1b169…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 20766ms |
| 84 | `a95a5829…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 26242ms |
| 85 | `22c0809b…` | Government | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 25444ms |
| 86 | `bf68f2ad…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 20968ms |
| 87 | `efca245f…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 26103ms |
| 88 | `9e39df84…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 23522ms |
| 89 | `68d8d901…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 25018ms |
| 90 | `1752cb53…` | Manufacturing | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 16127ms |
| 91 | `bd72994f…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 23268ms |
| 92 | `211d0093…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 14274ms |
| 93 | `d4525420…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 14580ms |
| 94 | `45c6237b…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 30502ms |
| 95 | `cecac8f9…` | Retail Trade | First-Line Supervi | ✅ success | - | 4 | 7/10 | 26530ms |
| 96 | `8f9e8bcd…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 28305ms |
| 97 | `0fad6023…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 28441ms |
| 98 | `02314fc6…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 28251ms |
| 99 | `4d61a19a…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 39668ms |
| 100 | `6436ff9e…` | Retail Trade | General and Operat | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 32861ms |
| 101 | `8a7b6fca…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 29041ms |
| 102 | `40a99a31…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 4 | 7/10 | 35430ms |
| 103 | `b9665ca1…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 32139ms |
| 104 | `c6269101…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | - | 4 | 5/10 | 35104ms |
| 105 | `be830ca0…` | Manufacturing | Industrial Enginee | ✅ success | Yes | 6 | 7/10 | 49267ms |
| 106 | `cd9efc18…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 36769ms |
| 107 | `a97369c7…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 32296ms |
| 108 | `3f625cb2…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 25884ms |
| 109 | `aad21e4c…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 24306ms |
| 110 | `8314d1b1…` | Professional, Scientif | Lawyers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 43917ms |
| 111 | `5e2b6aab…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 10 | 6/10 | 32486ms |
| 112 | `46fc494e…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 3 | 3/10 | 39139ms |
| 113 | `3940b7e7…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 27521ms |
| 114 | `8077e700…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | Yes | 3 | 7/10 | 25347ms |
| 115 | `5a2d70da…` | Manufacturing | Mechanical Enginee | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 6/10 | 29111ms |
| 116 | `74d6e8b0…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 33290ms |
| 117 | `81db15ff…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 19345ms |
| 118 | `61b0946a…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 38363ms |
| 119 | `61e7b9c6…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 21443ms |
| 120 | `c9bf9801…` | Health Care and Social | Medical and Health | ✅ success | - | 3 | 8/10 | 47217ms |
| 121 | `f1be6436…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 5 | 5/10 | 29093ms |
| 122 | `41f6ef59…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 25966ms |
| 123 | `a0552909…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 25344ms |
| 124 | `6d2c8e55…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 5 | 6/10 | 32625ms |
| 125 | `4b98ccce…` | Health Care and Social | Medical Secretarie | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 28300ms |
| 126 | `60221cd0…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 24137ms |
| 127 | `ef8719da…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 23718ms |
| 128 | `3baa0009…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 29356ms |
| 129 | `5d0feb24…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 37633ms |
| 130 | `6974adea…` | Information | News Analysts, Rep | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 47161ms |
| 131 | `1a78e076…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 32256ms |
| 132 | `1b9ec237…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 27176ms |
| 133 | `0112fc9b…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 24913ms |
| 134 | `772e7524…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 18817ms |
| 135 | `e6429658…` | Health Care and Social | Nurse Practitioner | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 31838ms |
| 136 | `b5d2e6f1…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 22169ms |
| 137 | `f841ddcf…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 22224ms |
| 138 | `47ef842d…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 20094ms |
| 139 | `1137e2bb…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 17932ms |
| 140 | `c3525d4d…` | Wholesale Trade | Order Clerks | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 25004ms |
| 141 | `9a0d8d36…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 5/10 | 20569ms |
| 142 | `664a42e5…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 22098ms |
| 143 | `feb5eefc…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 25751ms |
| 144 | `3600de06…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 25135ms |
| 145 | `c657103b…` | Finance and Insurance | Personal Financial | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 29661ms |
| 146 | `ae0c1093…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 4 | 9/10 | 30246ms |
| 147 | `f9f82549…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 8 | 8/10 | 38008ms |
| 148 | `57b2cdf2…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 30236ms |
| 149 | `84322284…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 31460ms |
| 150 | `a46d5cd2…` | Retail Trade | Private Detectives | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 7/10 | 35453ms |
| 151 | `6241e678…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 30469ms |
| 152 | `e14e32ba…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 33099ms |
| 153 | `b1a79ce1…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 40707ms |
| 154 | `e4f664ea…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 32398ms |
| 155 | `a079d38f…` | Information | Producers and Dire | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 23629ms |
| 156 | `02aa1805…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 2 | 3/10 | 21872ms |
| 157 | `fd6129bd…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 26131ms |
| 158 | `ce864f41…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 26764ms |
| 159 | `58ac1cc5…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | - | 4 | 9/10 | 27552ms |
| 160 | `3c19c6d1…` | Professional, Scientif | Project Management | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 28616ms |
| 161 | `a99d85fc…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 28254ms |
| 162 | `55ddb773…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 27761ms |
| 163 | `1e5a1d7f…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 16631ms |
| 164 | `0419f1c3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 27027ms |
| 165 | `ed2bc14c…` | Real Estate and Rental | Property, Real Est | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 24283ms |
| 166 | `46bc7238…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 8 | 8/10 | 28319ms |
| 167 | `2d06bc0a…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 29357ms |
| 168 | `fd3ad420…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 17514ms |
| 169 | `0818571f…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 12 | 5/10 | 31795ms |
| 170 | `6074bba3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Broker | ✅ success | - | 4 | 3/10 | 25807ms |
| 171 | `5ad0c554…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 19316ms |
| 172 | `11593a50…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 3 | 2/10 | 42643ms |
| 173 | `94925f49…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | Yes | 11 | 6/10 | 36950ms |
| 174 | `90f37ff3…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 26506ms |
| 175 | `d3d255b2…` | Real Estate and Rental | Real Estate Sales  | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 32388ms |
| 176 | `403b9234…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 7/10 | 20132ms |
| 177 | `1bff4551…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 31894ms |
| 178 | `650adcb1…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 25237ms |
| 179 | `01d7e53e…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 25158ms |
| 180 | `a73fbc98…` | Government | Recreation Workers | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 19597ms |
| 181 | `0ec25916…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 17526ms |
| 182 | `116e791e…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 18194ms |
| 183 | `dd724c67…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 28039ms |
| 184 | `7151c60a…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 3/10 | 17978ms |
| 185 | `90edba97…` | Health Care and Social | Registered Nurses | ✅ success | - | 2 | 2/10 | 25387ms |
| 186 | `91060ff0…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 19215ms |
| 187 | `8384083a…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 20675ms |
| 188 | `045aba2e…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 6 | 6/10 | 19872ms |
| 189 | `f2986c1f…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 10850ms |
| 190 | `ffed32d8…` | Retail Trade | Pharmacists | ✅ success | Yes | 2 | 2/10 | 24590ms |
| 191 | `b3573f20…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 23458ms |
| 192 | `a69be28f…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 8/10 | 25067ms |
| 193 | `788d2bc6…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 6/10 | 26079ms |
| 194 | `74ed1dc7…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 1 | 9/10 | 22170ms |
| 195 | `69a8ef86…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Managers | ✅ success | - | 2 | 9/10 | 32614ms |
| 196 | `ab81b076…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 4 | 8/10 | 24889ms |
| 197 | `d7cfae6f…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 23785ms |
| 198 | `19403010…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 23360ms |
| 199 | `7ed932dd…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 6/10 | 20411ms |
| 200 | `105f8ad0…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 20733ms |
| 201 | `b57efde3…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 19816ms |
| 202 | `15d37511…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 20280ms |
| 203 | `bb863dd9…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 21917ms |
| 204 | `fe0d3941…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | - | 3 | 7/10 | 26221ms |
| 205 | `6a900a40…` | Wholesale Trade | Sales Representati | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 4/10 | 22941ms |
| 206 | `9efbcd35…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 27835ms |
| 207 | `1d4672c8…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | Yes | 3 | 5/10 | 23854ms |
| 208 | `4de6a529…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 2 | 4/10 | 32366ms |
| 209 | `4c4dc603…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 2 | 5/10 | 29753ms |
| 210 | `bb499d9c…` | Finance and Insurance | Securities, Commod | ✅ success | - | 3 | 8/10 | 34290ms |
| 211 | `5349dd7b…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 1 | 6/10 | 20681ms |
| 212 | `a4a9195c…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 1 | 8/10 | 24535ms |
| 213 | `552b7dd0…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | - | 3 | 6/10 | 24813ms |
| 214 | `11dcc268…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 13780ms |
| 215 | `76418a2c…` | Manufacturing | Shipping, Receivin | ✅ success | Yes | 1 | 3/10 | 15088ms |
| 216 | `0e386e32…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 3/10 | 22010ms |
| 217 | `7de33b48…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 1 | 4/10 | 23000ms |
| 218 | `854f3814…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ❌ error | Yes | 0 | - | 16210ms |
| 219 | `4122f866…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 6 | 4/10 | 28687ms |
| 220 | `2c249e0f…` | Professional, Scientif | Software Developer | ✅ success | - | 2 | 7/10 | 26082ms |

## QA Issues

### ✅ `83d10b06…` — score 7/10
- Sample selection criteria coverage across specified entities and regions is not explicitly evidenced.
- QoQ variance calculation shows infinite values without documented handling approach.
- Sample size calculation omits population size and finite population adjustment.
  > 💡 Explicitly document criteria coverage, handle zero-denominator variances, and enhance sample size methodology transparency.

### ❌ `7b08cd4d…` — score 3/10
- Revenue by city and country is missing with zero values throughout.
- No separation of income and costs by source with combined totals.
- Expenses lack required category breakdown and net income is absent.
  > 💡 Populate detailed revenue, tax calculations, expense categories, sources, totals, and net income as specified.

### ❌ `7d7fc9a7…` — score 3/10
- Prepaid Summary lacks required YTD amortization totals and reporting snapshot fields.
- Ending balances do not reconcile to provided April GL balances.
- Schedules do not clearly reflect BCBS monthly billing and policy treatment.
  > 💡 Rework schedules to reconcile monthly to GL balances and rebuild the summary with required YTD metrics.

### ✅ `43dc9778…` — score 5/10
- Form 1040 is a narrative summary, not a completed IRS form with line entries.
- Required schedules and forms are described but not actually included as separate IRS forms.
- Long-term care insurance is referenced without including or completing Schedule A.
  > 💡 Prepare a fully completed 2024 Form 1040 with all required IRS schedules and forms attached as PDFs.

### ❌ `ee09d943…` — score 3/10
- Workbook still reflects March dates instead of April.
- CFO-reserved Tabs 1, 2, 2a, and 3 are included.
- April source files are not reflected in updated schedules.
  > 💡 Update all tabs to April data, remove CFO-reserved tabs, and clearly reference April source files.

### ❌ `f84ea6ac…` — score 3/10
- Word document lacks the required summary table and point-form content.
- No five academic articles are identified, summarized, or cited.
- Key findings and government implications are missing.
  > 💡 Add a one-page table summarizing five post-2020 public studies with findings and implications.

### ✅ `a328feea…` — score 9/10
- Procedure does not specify an alternate contact if Supervisor or Team Lead is unreachable.
  > 💡 Add a clear escalation or alternate contact method when the primary contact is unavailable.

### ✅ `27e8912c…` — score 7/10
- Organizational Action Items document lacks a populated tracking table with required columns.
- Action Items document does not include employee and resolution tracking fields.
- Ergonomic images lack cited public-domain sources.
  > 💡 Add a complete tracking table with required fields and cite public-domain image sources.

### ✅ `17111c03…` — score 8/10
- Excel schedule dates are in 2025, which conflicts with the 2026 memo date.
  > 💡 Update the cleanup schedule dates to align with the current year.

### ✅ `c44e9b62…` — score 6/10
- FTE report does not clearly demonstrate a minimum 4% total branch reduction.
- Regional Support Service Lead FTEs remain unchanged despite regional office reduction.
- Organizational chart lacks clear visual highlighting of reduced positions.
  > 💡 Quantify total FTE reductions, correct regional FTE counts, and visibly mark eliminated positions in the chart.

### ✅ `99ac6944…` — score 6/10
- Mixer only provides one aux send, preventing two truly independent IEM mixes.
- Required retailer web links are not visible in the document.
- Including microphones may exceed scope of an IEM-only rig.
  > 💡 Use an analogue mixer with at least two aux sends and add clear retailer links.

### ✅ `f9a1c16c…` — score 6/10
- Vox2 IEM split is missing from the Outputs list.
- IEM split is incorrectly listed as an Input instead of an Output.
- Drummer wedge angle and placement are not clearly indicated.
  > 💡 Correct IEM split routing and clarify drummer wedge placement to fully meet the advance requirements.

### ✅ `38889c3b…` — score 6/10
- Zip contents not verified for required stems and master track.
- No proof instrumentation is synchronized to provided drum reference.
- No confirmation of 48kHz 24-bit float format for each file.
  > 💡 Include a contents manifest detailing stems, durations, keys, BPM, and export settings.

### ✅ `ff85ee58…` — score 6/10
- No loudness or true-peak measurements provided to verify LUFS and ceiling compliance.
- Saxophone resync position relative to reference is not documented or evidenced.
- Timing edits to 1/8-note grid at 50 BPM are not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Include a brief technical report with LUFS, true peak, and alignment details.

### ✅ `4b894ae3…` — score 6/10
- No explicit confirmation wrong-note replacements were copied from in-key sections.
- Bass Edit Spots.docx timecodes are not specifically acknowledged or enumerated.
- Bass level matching to Rough Mix is asserted but not evidenced.
  > 💡 Explicitly document each bass fix using provided timecodes and confirm in-key note sourcing.

### ✅ `1b1ade2d…` — score 8/10
- Minor typographical error found in section heading "Supplier Identification a".
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing key workflow changes.
- Confidence score included without explanation or linkage to evaluation criteria.
  > 💡 Fix minor typos and add a concise executive summary in the text response highlighting key workflow changes.

### ✅ `93b336f3…` — score 8/10
- Introduces an unrequested 49:51 equity split assumption without justification.
- Annual savings figure formatting includes an unnecessary trailing comma.
  > 💡 Explicitly flag assumptions like equity structure or seek approval before inclusion.

### ✅ `15ddd28d…` — score 6/10
- Document contains truncated content and incomplete BATNA section.
- Some required sections lack full detail and execution depth.
- Final roadmap and negotiation actions are not fully concluded.
  > 💡 Complete all truncated sections and add a clear, finalized negotiation and transition roadmap.

### ✅ `24d1e93f…` — score 6/10
- Summary sheet lacks clear recommendation and supporting comments.
- No explicit assumptions list included as requested.
- Used volume and cost data without referencing provided attachments.
  > 💡 Add a clear recommendation, assumptions section, and reference source data explicitly in the workbook.

### ✅ `05389f78…` — score 6/10
- Cost comparison in INR using provided quotations is missing.
- Required calculations and quantitative analysis are replaced by qualitative assumptions.
- Report does not fully leverage the attached 'Model A HL quotes' data.
  > 💡 Revise the CPO report to include full INR cost tables and calculations from the quotation file.

### ✅ `575f8679…` — score 8/10
- Appendix tool citations and links are partially truncated in the preview.
- Data analysis lacks specific timelines and responsible staff roles.
- Ethical considerations and consent procedures are not explicitly described.
  > 💡 Add clear timelines, roles, ethics procedures, and complete citations to strengthen evaluation rigor.

### ✅ `a74ead3b…` — score 8/10
- File content cannot be verified due to unsupported preview.
- Alignment with manual content is not explicitly documented.
- Icebreaker and wrap-up inclusion cannot be confirmed.
  > 💡 Add brief speaker notes or a content checklist referencing manual sections for verification.

### ✅ `bbe0a93b…` — score 6/10
- Resource guide was not created using an open web search as required.
- Spanish follow-up table headers are malformed and unclear.
- Needs assessment DOCX files lack the full screening tables.
  > 💡 Redo the resource guide using a live web search and fix table headers and consistency.

### ✅ `85d95ce5…` — score 6/10
- Report does not meet the required 8–15 page length.
- Required blank fields on the first page are not clearly demonstrated.
- A DOCX file was included despite instructions to submit only a PDF.
  > 💡 Expand the report to the required length and verify template fields and submission format exactly match instructions.

### ✅ `76d10872…` — score 9/10
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing completed report contents.
  > 💡 Briefly summarize key report sections and confirmation of completion in the text response.

### ✅ `36d567ba…` — score 6/10
- Topic 11 high-risk status question is missing from the document.
- Topic 10 timekeeping question and Uniform Guidance citation are not evident.
  > 💡 Add the missing topic questions and ensure all required Uniform Guidance citations are included.

### ✅ `2696757c…` — score 8/10
- An extra DOCX file was produced despite requesting a single PDF deliverable.
- Test questions reference timeliness without citing a specific VA-required timeframe.
  > 💡 Limit deliverables to the requested PDF and tighten questions to mirror exact regulatory language.

### ✅ `4c18ebae…` — score 7/10
- Transactional overview references December 2024 activity after Bluehaven accounts reportedly closed August 2024.
- SAR narrative lacks specific dollar amounts, dates, and account numbers typically expected by FinCEN.
- Excel file shows incomplete transaction descriptions, reducing evidentiary clarity.
  > 💡 Reconcile timeline inconsistencies and add precise transactional details to strengthen regulatory adequacy.

### ✅ `cebf301e…` — score 9/10
- PDF export security controls like watermarking or download restrictions are not specified.
  > 💡 Add brief security considerations for PDF exports to align with proposal confidentiality needs.

### ✅ `c2e8f271…` — score 7/10
- Commit-message guidelines are not clearly present in the document preview.
  > 💡 Add a dedicated commit-message guidelines section with examples and rationale.

### ✅ `2ea2e5b5…` — score 5/10
- No evidence the Excel source data was actually used or referenced.
- Activity classifications are described but not explicitly shown or validated.
- Strategic level requirements appear incomplete or insufficiently addressed.
  > 💡 Explicitly reference source data and include clear classification tables for all required dimensions.

### ✅ `c357f0e2…` — score 5/10
- Only 54 test cases provided instead of required 80–100.
- Excel column headers do not match expected template field names.
- Limited coverage of Viewers and Super Admin role scenarios.
  > 💡 Expand the test plan to 80–100 cases and align columns and role coverage with requirements.

### ✅ `a45bc83b…` — score 7/10
- Architecture diagram does not use official GCP icons as explicitly required.
- Layer 3 and Layer 4 DDoS protection is not clearly or accurately described.
- An extra PPTX file was produced that was not requested.
  > 💡 Update the diagram with official GCP icons and clarify edge-based L3/L4 DDoS protection.

### ❌ `a10ec48c…` — score 2/10
- Required tables with columns and rows are missing.
- No restaurant entries, links, hours, descriptions, or directions included.
- Specified sourcing from Downtown Sarasota and Google Maps not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Populate the Word document with complete, verified tables and restaurant details per requirements.

### ✅ `fccaa4a1…` — score 7/10
- PDF is three pages, not the requested two-page itinerary.
- Age requirement lists 2–14 years, conflicting with the 16-year-old participant.
- Icons and visual styling are not clearly evident in the PDF preview.
  > 💡 Revise the PDF to two pages, correct age requirements, and enhance visual icon-based layout.

### ✅ `f5d428fd…` — score 6/10
- PDF exceeds two-page requirement with five pages.
- Royalty-free image sources are not cited or documented.
- No evidence of research references from specified travel sources.
  > 💡 Condense the PDF to two pages and add clear citations for image sources and research references.

### ✅ `2fa8e956…` — score 6/10
- Document footer titled Napa Valley Wineries is missing or not visible.
- Grape varieties are not formatted in purple Georgia 9 pt.
- Sources for wineries and Google Maps distances are not cited.
  > 💡 Add the required footer, apply specified formatting, and include explicit source citations.

### ✅ `0e4fe8cd…` — score 6/10
- One link is malformed with an incomplete https URL.
- Airport code ISL is incorrect and linked airport website is mismatched.
- Car service details reuse aviation links instead of actual ground providers.
  > 💡 Validate all links, airport codes, and providers, and ensure a complete four-day return itinerary.

### ✅ `aa071045…` — score 6/10
- Summary sheet has no data rows and incorrect structure for total damage revenue.
- Operational conclusions are placed as a column header instead of report content.
- Excel report lacks clear linkage to analyzed source data from Damage list.xlsx.
  > 💡 Fix the Excel report structure with proper data rows, summaries, and clearly documented conclusions.

### ❌ `476db143…` — score 4/10
- Inspection schedule PDF lacks resident rows and required data.
- Reference files were not used to populate units, names, dates.
- No confirmed or adjusted inspection dates are shown.
  > 💡 Populate the schedule using the reference files and include all required resident details and dates.

### ✅ `61f546a8…` — score 6/10
- On-site staff two-day work is missing for three apartments.
- Appliance installation extra day is not scheduled or shown.
- Make-ready date changes are vague and not unit-specific.
  > 💡 Add explicit staff workdays and appliance install days for each unit, clarifying make-ready impacts.

### ✅ `f3351922…` — score 7/10
- Email body not included in text response, only described.
- Transitioning service member benefits section lacks specific details like matching and contribution limits.
  > 💡 Include fuller transitioning benefits details and paste the full email text in the response.

### ✅ `61717508…` — score 8/10
- Training PDF preview does not explicitly show Senior Safe Act or FINRA Rule 2165 content.
  > 💡 Add a clearly labeled slide summarizing Senior Safe Act and FINRA Rule 2165 protections.

### ✅ `0ed38524…` — score 5/10
- Summary contains typos, truncation, and incorrect district references.
- Talking points are repetitive boilerplate and include duplicate sections.
- Content quality suggests incomplete or careless use of the Excel source.
  > 💡 Proofread, correct district accuracy, remove duplication, and ensure full synthesis from the source data.

### ✅ `d025a41c…` — score 7/10
- Section titles are not shown in bold formatting as required.
- Final explanation text in Case Three appears truncated.
- Compliance with 1.5 line spacing is not verifiable from content.
  > 💡 Ensure formatting requirements are met and review the document for completeness before submission.

### ✅ `401a07f1…` — score 6/10
- Editorial lacks explicit clickable URLs to referenced news stories.
- Text response is descriptive rather than presenting the actual editorial content.
  > 💡 Add direct hyperlinks to cited articles and include the full editorial text in the response.

### ❌ `afe56d05…` — score 4/10
- Document does not meet the required 2,200–2,300 word length.
- External resources and hyperlinks are missing or insufficiently cited.
  > 💡 Expand content to required length and add properly attributed hyperlinks to all referenced standards.

### ✅ `9a8c8e28…` — score 6/10
- Framework guide appears too brief and likely lacks a bibliography with external links.
- Guide does not clearly mention Slack training dates to be announced.
- CMS change responsibilities and dev team ownership are not clearly documented.
  > 💡 Expand the framework guide to explicitly include bibliography links, training notes, and CMS responsibility statements.

### ✅ `3a4c347c…` — score 6/10
- Only four feature ideas provided instead of eight required across four weeks.
- Draft four-week broadcast and publication schedule is missing or insufficiently detailed.
- KPIs and sponsorship success metrics are not clearly presented as a dedicated section.
  > 💡 Expand the document with eight features, a clear weekly schedule, and a consolidated KPIs and sponsorship section.

### ❌ `ec2fccc9…` — score 3/10
- Article is far shorter than the required 1,500 words.
- Secondary keywords list and SEO research section are missing.
- Lacks proper H2/H3 structure, links, and detailed artist highlights.
  > 💡 Expand content to full length, add SEO keywords, proper headers, links, and complete all specified sections.

### ✅ `8c8fc328…` — score 8/10
- Provided voiceover reference is not explicitly integrated or quoted.
- Child-focused language cues could be more clearly simplified in places.
  > 💡 Explicitly align sections with the provided voiceover text and add clearer child-friendly phrasing.

### ✅ `e222075d…` — score 6/10
- Final 30-second H.264 MP4 export was not delivered.
- Scratch voiceover audio track is missing.
- Stock footage and music links are placeholders, not direct preview URLs.
  > 💡 Provide the actual MP4 export, add a scratch VO audio file, and replace placeholders with real stock preview links.

### ❌ `c94452e4…` — score 4/10
- Uses proxy plates instead of required royalty-free stock footage.
- No dramatic music track included or edited to 15 seconds.
- Supers from provided PSD not demonstrably used or validated.
  > 💡 Produce a true 15-second edit using stock footage, music, and PSD supers as specified.

### ❌ `75401f7c…` — score 3/10
- Final MP4 showreel file was not produced.
- Deliverable does not include edited video meeting duration and codec requirements.
- Output substitutes planning documents for the required finished reel.
  > 💡 Produce and deliver the actual edited 01:20 MP4 showreel matching all technical and creative requirements.

### ❌ `a941b6d8…` — score 3/10
- No actual VFX composite performed; deliverable is a planning proxy only.
- Overlay stabilization, masking, tracking, and compositing were not executed.
- Final video does not demonstrate teleportation effect with smoke and flash.
  > 💡 Deliver a fully composited shot implementing all specified VFX steps using the provided clips.

### ❌ `8079e27d…` — score 3/10
- Excel contains no S&P 500 companies or valuation data.
- Task required leveraging publicly available data, but only a blank template was delivered.
- Output does not enable analysis of above/below historical P/E as requested.
  > 💡 Populate the workbook with current S&P 500 company and sub-sector data sourced from public websites.

### ✅ `e21cd746…` — score 8/10
- Table formatting has visible line breaks and truncated words reducing polish.
- Customer lists are labeled representative without specific named accounts.
- Valuations and multiples are illustrative without cited data sources.
  > 💡 Tighten formatting, name key customers where possible, and cite valuation data sources.

### ✅ `9e8607e7…` — score 8/10
- Slide count is below the requested ~30-slide target.
- Limited explicit discussion of regulatory frameworks by key LatAm countries.
  > 💡 Consider adding a few slides on country-specific regulation and payments infrastructure to reach target length.

### ❌ `c7d83f01…` — score 4/10
- Notebook appears nearly empty and lacks implemented pricing methodologies.
- Runtime benchmark visualizations are missing.
- Monte Carlo, binomial, and finite-difference implementations are not evidenced.
  > 💡 Provide a fully implemented, well-documented notebook with methods, benchmarks, and analysis.

### ✅ `46b34f78…` — score 5/10
- Specific oil and gas issuers are not identified or analyzed with quantitative metrics.
- Public data sources and reference file are not cited or substantively used.
- Trading strategy lacks concrete H1 2025 trade ideas and sizing within constraints.
  > 💡 Add issuer-specific quantitative analysis using cited public data and propose concrete, constraint-aware H1 2025 trades.

### ✅ `a1963a68…` — score 7/10
- Lacks explicit data points, charts, or citations supporting market and regulatory analysis.
- Future-proofing through innovation and sustainability is not clearly addressed in core slides.
- Public sources referenced in task are not explicitly cited or analyzed.
  > 💡 Add data-backed insights with cited sources and a dedicated future-proofing slide covering innovation and sustainability.

### ❌ `5f6c57dd…` — score 3/10
- Workbook lacks populated calculations and formulas from raw data.
- Several sheets have empty cells, unnamed columns, and no computed metrics.
- Dropdown functionality and branch-driven aggregation are not evidenced.
  > 💡 Populate all worksheets with formulas, validated dropdowns, and complete calculations using the raw data.

### ✅ `b39a5aa7…` — score 5/10
- Summary lacks breakdown by compensation type as required.
- Input fields do not cover all negotiated drivers or assumptions.
- Projections show flat growth rates, not true year-over-year calculations by quarter.
  > 💡 Expand inputs and summaries to fully reflect CBA drivers and compensation types with accurate Y/Y logic.

### ✅ `b78fd844…` — score 8/10
- Text response is generic and does not summarize key analytical conclusions.
- Previewed content does not yet confirm the $100M dual-project allocation section.
  > 💡 Add a concise executive summary in the text response highlighting recommendation, returns, and capital allocation.

### ✅ `4520f882…` — score 5/10
- CBA-specific rules and rates are generic and not clearly derived from the provided excerpt.
- No explicit schedule or per-service breakdown to support CBA premium calculations.
- Conflict highlighting and validations are claimed but not evident in the file preview.
  > 💡 Incorporate explicit CBA-based rules, detailed schedule inputs, and visible validation formulas tied to the excerpt.

### ✅ `ec591973…` — score 6/10
- Text response describes intent but does not summarize actual slide content.
- Cannot verify slide addresses all specified business challenges and channel differentiation.
- No evidence of concrete assortment, CRM, or loyalty tactics by channel.
  > 💡 Include a brief content summary or screenshot to confirm the slide meets all strategic requirements.

### ✅ `62f04c2f…` — score 6/10
- Excel form lacks freight prepayment and restocking fee notice at the bottom.
- Excel form is missing signature and date spaces for sales rep, GM, and Sales Manager.
  > 💡 Revise the Excel form to add required fee notice and all approval signature sections.

### ❌ `3f821c2d…` — score 3/10
- EOM Inventory and Turn cells are blank with no working formulas.
- Omni-level and Last Year comparison tables are missing.
- Sales and BOM inventory appear duplicated across channels incorrectly.
  > 💡 Complete all calculations, add omni and LY tables, and validate channel-specific data accuracy.

### ✅ `e996036e…` — score 5/10
- Total shipments equal $200,000, not the required $225,000 retail value.
- Cash flow timing calculations are not shown beyond listing payment terms.
- Excel lacks embedded executive summary paragraph and visible visual comparison.
  > 💡 Update shipment totals to $225,000, add cash flow timing metrics, and include chart plus embedded summary.

### ❌ `6dcae3f5…` — score 4/10
- Key indicators are unnamed, making benchmarks unclear and unusable.
- Excel lacks yearly intervals, totals, and PGY-specific benchmarks.
- Did not determine PGY when PGY-5 residents met ACGME requirements.
  > 💡 Rebuild the Excel using named ACGME indicators, full PGY benchmarks, and requirement attainment years.

### ✅ `1aecc095…` — score 6/10
- Telehealth Roadmap lacks a Visio-style visual workflow and appears minimal.
- Telehealth Workflow seems shorter than the required two to three pages.
- Email content appears truncated and may not meet the 100–150 word requirement.
  > 💡 Expand documents to meet length and visual requirements and ensure the email is complete.

### ❌ `0353ee0c…` — score 2/10
- Document lacks the required exhaustive lists of presumptive exposures, conditions, locations, and dates.
- Content relies on placeholders directing veterans to links instead of consolidating information.
- PDF is far too short and omits most required conditions and eligibility details.
  > 💡 Fully extract and organize all presumptive exposures, conditions, locations, and dates from Document B into the PDF.

### ✅ `40a8c4b1…` — score 5/10
- Sessions are split into 7–8 and 8–9 rows instead of single 7–9 sessions.
- No evidence holidays were excluded from the Wednesday schedule.
- Unused optional topics are not shown highlighted in yellow.
  > 💡 Consolidate each Wednesday into one 7–9 AM entry, exclude holidays, and visibly mark unused optional topics.

### ❌ `4d1a8410…` — score 3/10
- Main schedule document lacks required table, timings, rooms, physicians, breaks, lunch, and applicant assignments.
- Personal itineraries are generic, identical, and omit tours, lunch, breaks, and physician names.
- Welcome talks, research talk, tour sequencing, and physician-specific break constraints are not shown.
  > 💡 Rebuild all documents with detailed tables and exact times fully matching every stated scheduling constraint.

### ✅ `8c823e32…` — score 8/10
- Data retention and privacy protections are not explicitly defined.
- FAA waiver and BVLOS compliance requirements are not specifically addressed.
- Section heading shows a truncated label indicating a formatting issue.
  > 💡 Add explicit privacy, data retention, and FAA waiver provisions and correct formatting before final approval.

### ✅ `11e1b169…` — score 8/10
- KRS 503.090 section is summarized but lacks key statutory language.
- Guide does not reference Kentucky-specific case law examples.
- No citations included for legal sources referenced in content.
  > 💡 Add brief statutory quotes and Kentucky case references to strengthen legal accuracy.

### ✅ `22c0809b…` — score 7/10
- PDF exceeds required length at five pages instead of two to four.
  > 💡 Condense content and formatting to meet the two to four page requirement.

### ✅ `bf68f2ad…` — score 6/10
- Spreadsheet ignores stated 30 standard hours per day production rate.
- Plan never models reduction to five-day or four-day work weeks.
- Starting cumulative balance does not match stated 438.81 past-due hours.
  > 💡 Recalculate hours using standard-hour assumptions and include scenarios reducing days worked once backlog clears.

### ✅ `efca245f…` — score 5/10
- Scenario 3 violates no-overtime constraint by assuming a 10-hour shift.
- Expanded capacity ignores stated 135 sets/day limit starting February 5.
- Stat holidays and customer March/April sequencing are not explicitly validated.
  > 💡 Revise scenarios to fully respect capacity, overtime, and holiday constraints, and validate priorities.

### ❌ `9e39df84…` — score 4/10
- Average Output and Total Output formulas are missing; columns are blank.
- Dashboard lacks required PivotTables, charts, and quadrant layout.
- Conditional formatting for top and bottom performers is not evident.
  > 💡 Add formulas, PivotTables, charts, and formatting to fully meet dashboard requirements.

### ✅ `68d8d901…` — score 6/10
- Production Sequences do not clearly separate or stagger workflows for each dryer.
- Work Schedule lacks throughput calculations proving 250,000 pounds achievable in four weeks.
- Full batch size usage across the trial is not explicitly validated.
  > 💡 Add per-dryer staggered timelines and throughput math confirming full-batch production meets the target.

### ✅ `1752cb53…` — score 6/10
- Team member assignment columns are entirely blank despite roster reference.
- Text response is generic and lacks confirmation of rule-based calculations.
- Validation that yellow cells only were edited is not demonstrated.
  > 💡 Populate operator and water spider assignments per the Team Member Roster and confirm yellow-cell compliance.

### ✅ `bd72994f…` — score 7/10
- PDF does not explicitly identify the selected brand or confirm official 2025 resort source.
- Only four looks are presented despite six PDF pages.
- PPTX file was produced though only a PDF was requested.
  > 💡 Add clear brand attribution and source confirmation, and align slide count strictly to defined looks.

### ✅ `211d0093…` — score 7/10
- Closing Duties section lacks actual task listings.
- Several tasks are duplicated or placed in incorrect duty sections.
- Mid-Day Duties incorrectly includes end-of-day filing and manager sign-off task.
  > 💡 Reorganize tasks by shift, remove duplicates, and populate Closing Duties appropriately.

### ✅ `d4525420…` — score 7/10
- Text response describes intent instead of providing the required selection paragraph.
- Text response does not directly answer the selection question.
- Reference to the Evaluation_stocking file is not explicit.
  > 💡 Include the full 5–7 sentence selection paragraph directly in the text response.

### ✅ `45c6237b…` — score 6/10
- Next Season Assortment slides lack vendor images.
- Final summary table with pricing and quantities is missing.
- Wholesale pricing for custom shirts is not shown.
  > 💡 Add vendor images, include a complete pricing summary table, and display shirt wholesale prices.

### ✅ `cecac8f9…` — score 7/10
- Uses USD currency despite UK store context requiring GBP.
- No explicit linkage to provided 2023 vs 2024 targets reference.
- Marketing Email content not clearly reflected in offers messaging.
  > 💡 Localise metrics to GBP and explicitly align goals and offers to the provided reference documents.

### ✅ `8f9e8bcd…` — score 6/10
- Conclusion section appears incomplete or truncated.
- Homework section is missing required tracking instructions and signature lines.
- Let’s Practice section includes limited examples across objection types.
  > 💡 Complete the conclusion, add the full homework section, and expand practice examples for all objection types.

### ✅ `0fad6023…` — score 7/10
- No clearly visible total and remaining capacity summary in the POG Builder sheet.
- Planogram is tabular only and lacks a more visual pan layout representation.
  > 💡 Add a clear total used versus remaining inches section and optional visual pan blocks for clarity.

### ✅ `02314fc6…` — score 7/10
- DOCX version lacks itemized checklist details beyond section headers.
- Checklist appears as a template, not a completed monthly submission.
- Corrective action scheduling fields are minimally defined.
  > 💡 Add detailed items to the DOCX and include explicit corrective action timelines and ownership fields.

### ✅ `6436ff9e…` — score 8/10
- Section 8 introduction shows an apparent typo or incomplete sentence beginning with "Wi".
  > 💡 Proofread the final document to fix minor typos and ensure all section introductions are complete.

### ✅ `40a99a31…` — score 7/10
- LIDAR selection lacks explicit justification tied to zone geometry and safety standards.
- Compatibility logic does not reference Parker servo drives or detailed IO mapping.
- Pressure mat and camera quantities are implied but not explicitly documented.
  > 💡 Add concise justifications, explicit device counts, and Parker drive IO compatibility details.

### ✅ `b9665ca1…` — score 6/10
- Schematic was authored in PowerPoint, not approved software like Visio or AutoCAD Electrical.
- Safety relay identification text appears inconsistent or truncated in the schematic.
- Original task ambiguity on series versus parallel E-stop wiring is not explicitly clarified.
  > 💡 Recreate the schematic in an approved electrical CAD tool and clearly verify relay labeling and E-stop topology.

### ✅ `c6269101…` — score 5/10
- Response describes intended deliverable but does not summarize actual analytical findings.
- No explicit capability, stability, or variability conclusions are presented in the text.
- Greatest-variability process and supporting statistics are not clearly identified.
  > 💡 Include a concise written summary of key analytical results and conclusions from the produced files.

### ✅ `be830ca0…` — score 7/10
- Text response does not confirm actual statistical results or conclusions.
- 1-sample hypothesis test target value was assumed without task specification.
- No verification that charts strictly use specified date ranges.
  > 💡 Explicitly summarize key statistical findings and confirm all assumptions and date filters used.

### ✅ `cd9efc18…` — score 6/10
- PDF length is six pages, not the required eight to eleven pages.
- Execution date and witness/notary details are not confirmed in the document preview.
- Temporary local guardian Michael T. Fisher is not shown in the trust/guardianship section.
  > 💡 Expand content and verify execution, guardianship, and affidavit sections to fully meet stated requirements.

### ✅ `a97369c7…` — score 7/10
- Moelis decision misidentified as Delaware Supreme Court rather than Court of Chancery.
- Text response is meta and does not itself analyze legal issues.
- Hyperlinks to cited statutes and legislation are not clearly included.
  > 💡 Correct the Moelis court attribution and ensure active hyperlinks to all cited authorities.

### ✅ `3f625cb2…` — score 6/10
- The memorandum is truncated and ends mid-sentence in the recommendations section.
- Relevant case law is mentioned generally without specific citations or summaries.
- The text response describes intent rather than summarizing substantive findings.
  > 💡 Complete the memorandum text, expand case law discussion, and align the text response with delivered content.

### ✅ `aad21e4c…` — score 7/10
- Anti-dilution section does not clearly state a fixed 10% fully diluted ownership floor.
- Capitalization schedule before and after investment is not clearly identified or labeled.
- Minority consent rights scope may lack sufficient specificity for all listed extraordinary actions.
  > 💡 Clarify the 10% ownership floor, expressly label the cap table schedule, and enumerate consent actions in detail.

### ✅ `8314d1b1…` — score 8/10
- Text response summarizes deliverable instead of substantive memo content.
- Memo header redundantly includes two "Re:" lines.
  > 💡 Ensure the text response briefly mirrors key memo conclusions and clean up minor header formatting.

### ✅ `5e2b6aab…` — score 6/10
- Missing power switch component and STEP model.
- O-ring and sealing components lack STEP models despite BOM listing.
- PDF drawings lack true exploded views and balloon callouts.
  > 💡 Add missing component models and update drawings with proper exploded views and balloons.

### ❌ `46fc494e…` — score 3/10
- No transient conduction calculations; temperatures remain unrealistically at 25 C.
- Required plots and node temperature profiles are missing.
- Back-face results contradict severe external heating conditions.
  > 💡 Perform and document the actual transient 22-node thermal calculation and include all required plots and tables.

### ❌ `3940b7e7…` — score 4/10
- Numerical results tables are missing actual values and contain placeholders.
- Key performance metrics like forces, velocities, and turbulence are not quantified.
- Simulation details from CFD data and STEP geometry are insufficiently described.
  > 💡 Populate tables with real CFD values and expand methodology using provided simulation and CAD data.

### ✅ `8077e700…` — score 7/10
- No tables from Data.xlsx are shown or explicitly summarized.
- AISI 1045 lacks dedicated hardness graphs or quantitative results.
- Microstructural discussion is qualitative and limited.
  > 💡 Include explicit tables and plots for both steels with clearer linkage to the provided dataset.

### ✅ `5a2d70da…` — score 6/10
- Master Tool List lacks subtotal and Suffolk County sales tax grand total.
- Manufacturing steps omit specific machine identification from Integration Proposal.
- Text claims budget compliance without showing total cost versus $7,500.
  > 💡 Add explicit cost totals with tax and clarify machine usage and budget compliance.

### ✅ `74d6e8b0…` — score 8/10
- Explicit in-text citations and reference formatting are not clearly demonstrated in the preview.
- Telehealth-specific workflow details could be more operationalized for clinicians.
- Medication dosing examples or tables are not evident in the preview.
  > 💡 Add clear in-text citations, dosing tables, and a step-by-step virtual care workflow section.

### ✅ `81db15ff…` — score 5/10
- Arizona and Washington PA supervision and independence rules appear inaccurate.
- Pennsylvania and West Virginia NP chart-signature requirements may be overstated.
- Recommendation relies on potentially incorrect regulatory assumptions.
  > 💡 Revalidate each state’s current NP and PA scope-of-practice laws using primary regulatory sources.

### ✅ `61b0946a…` — score 6/10
- Deliverables were not explicitly requested in the original task.
- Proposal omits specific scheduling constraints like three-hour thaw window.
- Cost analysis uses an unsupported assumed annual budget figure.
  > 💡 Align outputs directly to the stated task and ground analyses in provided constraints and data.

### ✅ `61e7b9c6…` — score 6/10
- Spreadsheet contains blank and partially completed rows.
- Several commonly used FDA-approved and off-label menopause treatments are missing.
- Template structure and sheet naming do not clearly match the provided template.
  > 💡 Complete all rows, remove blanks, and expand the formulary to include all standard menopause therapies.

### ✅ `c9bf9801…` — score 8/10
- Mentor and mentee applications are combined rather than clearly separated documents.
- Program timeline detail and monthly milestones are not fully verifiable from preview.
- CDC branding elements and logo integration are not evident in file preview.
  > 💡 Consider separating applications, strengthening timeline specificity, and visibly applying CDC branding.

### ✅ `f1be6436…` — score 5/10
- Uses estimated data instead of actual ACP registration and live booking screenshots.
- Does not account for Dr. Doe’s April 18 departure constraint in travel plans.
- Missing departmental versus discretionary fund cost calculations.
  > 💡 Recreate the document using live sources, accurate dates, and complete funding breakdowns.

### ✅ `41f6ef59…` — score 8/10
- Spreadsheet shows no visible dropdowns, checkboxes, or data validation formatting.
  > 💡 Add data validation dropdowns or checkboxes for status columns to improve entry efficiency.

### ✅ `6d2c8e55…` — score 6/10
- Article PDFs contain citations and links, not full accessible articles.
- Several cited journals are likely paywalled, violating access requirements.
- No evidence holidays or conferences were checked against the schedule.
  > 💡 Replace with fully accessible article PDFs and document holiday checks before resubmission.

### ✅ `4b98ccce…` — score 6/10
- Deceased correspondence content is not verified against required deceased-specific explanation.
- Letters do not explicitly show inclusion of all Letter Template Sheet elements.
- Excel sheets include unnecessary blank rows before signatures.
  > 💡 Verify letter templates fully match provided sheets and remove extraneous blank rows.

### ✅ `60221cd0…` — score 7/10
- Early voting start date appears inaccurate for November 4, 2025 election.
- Voter registration deadline date may be off by one day.
- Text response describes deliverable instead of presenting article content.
  > 💡 Verify all dates against the official Virginia Department of Elections 2025 calendar.

### ✅ `ef8719da…` — score 6/10
- Text response does not include the actual pitch content.
- Hyperlinks to background articles are incomplete or not embedded.
- Sourcing plan lacks specific named examples or confirmed contacts.
  > 💡 Include the full pitch text in the response with complete hyperlinks and more concrete sourcing details.

### ✅ `3baa0009…` — score 7/10
- Article does not explicitly state 300–500 word count or include numeric forecast figures.
- AP reporting is referenced without a specific June 10, 2025 date.
- The chart is not embedded in or referenced within the article text.
  > 💡 Add specific forecast numbers, cite AP with a date, and reference or embed the chart in the article.

### ✅ `5d0feb24…` — score 5/10
- The response text is generic and does not summarize specific editorial findings.
- Engagement with the cited arXiv study’s novel methodology is unclear or missing.
- Confidence tag appears as placeholder and is not part of requested deliverable.
  > 💡 Explicitly reference the study’s methods and findings in the response summary.

### ✅ `6974adea…` — score 8/10
- Word count may be close to the 1,000-word minimum.
- SEO optimisation of the headline is not explicitly evidenced.
- Reliance on source documents is implied but not explicitly cited.
  > 💡 Add a brief word count check and clarify SEO keywords and source attribution.

### ✅ `1a78e076…` — score 5/10
- Document length appears far below the required 10–15 pages.
- Results subthemes are not clearly delineated as specified.
- Reference list content and count cannot be verified from the file preview.
  > 💡 Expand the manuscript to full length, clearly structure required subthemes, and verify references meet stated limits.

### ✅ `1b9ec237…` — score 6/10
- Slide content, count, and speaker notes cannot be verified from preview.
- Presence of pre-test question and case study not directly confirmed.
- References formatting and AHA guideline accuracy not verifiable.
  > 💡 Provide slide thumbnails or an outline summarizing each slide’s content for verification.

### ✅ `0112fc9b…` — score 8/10
- Assessment section appears truncated in the file preview, risking incomplete documentation.
  > 💡 Verify the document exports fully with complete assessment and plan sections.

### ✅ `e6429658…` — score 6/10
- Appeal letter does not meet the required 2–4 page length.
- AbbVie application was recreated in Word instead of completing the official PDF form.
  > 💡 Expand the appeal letter to full length and complete the official AbbVie PDF application.

### ✅ `b5d2e6f1…` — score 6/10
- Data tab contains raw data, not a pivot table as required.
- Sales by Brand tab lacks a visible grand total row.
- Column order and ST% placement do not match the specified header sequence.
  > 💡 Convert Data into a pivot source, add grand totals, and align column headers exactly to requirements.

### ✅ `47ef842d…` — score 6/10
- Calculations are not shown despite the requirement to show your work.
- Weeks of Supply values appear implausibly high, indicating a likely rate calculation error.
- Methodology for active store determination is not documented in the workbook.
  > 💡 Add a calculations sheet clearly documenting formulas, assumptions, and data sources for all metrics.

### ✅ `1137e2bb…` — score 9/10
- SKU summary is static and not a pivot table with explicit drill-down functionality.
- Minor floating-point precision artifacts appear in unit price values.
  > 💡 Consider converting the SKU summary to a pivot table and rounding currency fields consistently.

### ✅ `c3525d4d…` — score 7/10
- Removed stores are not identified or listed anywhere.
- Specific store examples like 4099 and 3737 are not explicitly confirmed.
- Basis for $1.00 unit cost increase from $0.25 shelf strip is undocumented.
  > 💡 Add a tab listing removed stores, confirm example stores, and document shelf strip quantity per unit.

### ✅ `9a0d8d36…` — score 5/10
- PPT content cannot be verified for required calculations and tax details.
- Text response describes intent rather than summarizing actual presentation content.
- No confirmation of hypothetical data or net proceeds comparison.
  > 💡 Provide a brief slide-by-slide summary or screenshots to verify required content.

### ✅ `664a42e5…` — score 8/10
- Slide content cannot be verified due to unsupported file preview.
  > 💡 Include a slide outline or speaker notes for easier content verification.

### ✅ `feb5eefc…` — score 8/10
- PDF page count compliance with 12-page limit is not explicitly verified.
- Conclusion recommendation clarity cannot be fully confirmed from provided preview.
  > 💡 Explicitly state the final recommendation and confirm page count within the PDF.

### ✅ `3600de06…` — score 7/10
- Slide count cannot be verified from provided preview.
- Explicit citations to FINRA and NAIC sources are not confirmed.
- Specific talking points content is not visible for QA review.
  > 💡 Include a slide outline with citations and confirm the presentation contains exactly ten slides.

### ✅ `c657103b…` — score 6/10
- Excel omits taxes due on Roth conversion amounts and marginal bracket modeling.
- Tax assumptions use a flat 35% rate, ignoring stated 32%-35% brackets.
- PowerPoint template requirement cannot be verified as the specified digital tunnel theme.
  > 💡 Add conversion tax calculations with bracket modeling and confirm the required presentation template.

### ✅ `ae0c1093…` — score 9/10
- Guide does not reference South Carolina-specific legal considerations.
  > 💡 Add a brief section noting South Carolina laws relevant to undercover employee investigations.

### ✅ `f9f82549…` — score 8/10
- PDF appears to list headers without a clear visual flowchart structure.
  > 💡 Enhance the PDF with arrows and decision paths to clearly depict the investigative flow.

### ✅ `57b2cdf2…` — score 9/10
- Surveillance end time exceeded the client’s requested 1:00 a.m. window without explanation.
- Courtesy start time is stated as 7:30 p.m. but logged as 7:25 p.m.
  > 💡 Briefly explain the extended end time and reconcile the courtesy start time for precision.

### ✅ `84322284…` — score 8/10
- Client name inconsistent between task and report.
- Timeline lacks precise daily timestamps for all observations.
- Investigator source notes are summarized but not explicitly cited.
  > 💡 Standardize client naming and add detailed, timestamped entries cross-referenced to investigator notes.

### ✅ `a46d5cd2…` — score 7/10
- Text response describes intent instead of summarizing findings.
- Company letterhead is not clearly identified in report content.
- Photographic evidence is referenced but not clearly embedded or captioned.
  > 💡 Ensure the narrative response summarizes findings and the PDF clearly shows letterhead and embedded photos.

### ✅ `6241e678…` — score 7/10
- Final delivery milestone on Aug. 29 is not explicitly labeled.
- Color-coding legend for phases and client tasks is not clearly shown.
- Text response describes intent instead of summarizing the actual schedule.
  > 💡 Add a labeled final delivery milestone and a visible color legend, and briefly summarize key dates in text.

### ✅ `e14e32ba…` — score 6/10
- Business hours are missing for all listed establishments.
- Physical locations are not explicitly stated.
- Image links point to websites, not actual photos.
  > 💡 Add clear addresses, business hours, and direct photo URLs for each deli.

### ✅ `b1a79ce1…` — score 8/10
- Moodboard content cannot be fully verified from preview alone.
- Text response is descriptive but lacks concrete references to specific brainstorming notes.
  > 💡 Add a brief legend listing palette names and key visual references tied to the notes.

### ✅ `e4f664ea…` — score 5/10
- Script length is only three pages, not the required eight to twelve.
- Author credit uses placeholder text instead of a real name.
- Some action lines tell emotions instead of purely showing behavior.
  > 💡 Expand scenes to reach required length, replace placeholders, and revise action to strictly show behavior.

### ✅ `a079d38f…` — score 7/10
- An administration fee was added without being requested in the original task.
- Time estimates are implicit and not clearly summarized as total production hours.
- Rates are not explicitly tied to the provided standard client service rates.
  > 💡 Remove unrequested fees and add a clear time summary aligned directly to provided rate standards.

### ❌ `02aa1805…` — score 3/10
- No Illinois EPA data was retrieved or reviewed as required.
- Excel file contains no well data or identified candidate wells.
- Email provides no recommendations or highlighted top well options.
  > 💡 Retrieve EPA factsheet data, populate the workbook, and provide clear well recommendations meeting criteria.

### ✅ `fd6129bd…` — score 7/10
- Change Request Form contains no completed example entry.
- One Excel column name appears truncated and incomplete.
- SOP lacks explicit change log tracking mechanism details.
  > 💡 Add a fully completed sample change request and correct all form fields for clarity.

### ✅ `ce864f41…` — score 7/10
- Text response does not answer the three required analysis questions.
- Department underutilization risk below 95% is not explicitly flagged.
- Overutilization status ignores stated 90% threshold context in narrative.
  > 💡 Add a brief written summary explicitly answering all three questions with clear risk conclusions.

### ✅ `3c19c6d1…` — score 6/10
- Slide content cannot be verified due to missing preview of required details.
- Progress summary tabular data requirement is not evidenced.
- Slide 3 specific bullet structure and numbering are unconfirmed.
  > 💡 Provide slide-by-slide content screenshots or text to verify compliance with all specified requirements.

### ❌ `a99d85fc…` — score 4/10
- Annual Rent Matrix contains no calculated rent values or totals.
- Monthly Rent Matrix shows only one scenario and lacks populated calculations.
- Notes section and gross lease value summaries are missing.
  > 💡 Populate all matrices with working formulas, totals, notes, and clearly separated scenarios.

### ✅ `55ddb773…` — score 6/10
- Form contains typographical artifacts and formatting errors that reduce professionalism.
- Architectural regulations and other sections appear truncated or incomplete.
- Unclear whether all violations from the attached Violations Questions PDF were fully included.
  > 💡 Proofread, correct formatting errors, and verify all required violation items are fully and clearly listed.

### ❌ `1e5a1d7f…` — score 3/10
- The .docx lacks the required table with four specified columns.
- No actual weekly schedule tasks, times, or week assignments are provided.
- File content appears introductory and incomplete, resembling placeholder text.
  > 💡 Populate the .docx with a complete table detailing times, activities, trackers, and week-of-month cycles.

### ✅ `0419f1c3…` — score 8/10
- Acknowledgement-time performance gaps are described without quantified portal response metrics.
  > 💡 Add specific acknowledgement-time statistics from the work order system to strengthen data support.

### ✅ `ed2bc14c…` — score 8/10
- Exit survey analysis lacks explicit five-category breakdown methodology.
- Renewal email drafts are high-level without sample subject lines or copy.
  > 💡 Add a brief appendix with survey categorization table and sample email copy.

### ✅ `46bc7238…` — score 8/10
- Cold call and email scripts are very brief and lack objection-handling depth.
- Flyer template example is minimal and lacks branding or visual layout detail.
  > 💡 Expand scripts with follow-up variations and enhance the flyer with branded layout and demographics.

### ✅ `2d06bc0a…` — score 8/10
- LOI does not clearly state an explicit expiration date or response deadline.
- Broker involvement section is implied but not explicitly stated as required.
  > 💡 Add a clear LOI expiration date and an explicit broker involvement section.

### ✅ `fd3ad420…` — score 8/10
- Document does not explicitly reference FL, GA, and NC licensing scope.
- No state-specific compliance caveats or variations are included.
  > 💡 Add a brief statement referencing licensed states and noting state-specific compliance adjustments may apply.

### ✅ `0818571f…` — score 5/10
- Properties are representative examples, not verified active listings from Crexi or LoopNet.
- Several properties lack complete financials, tenant mix, and GLA details.
- Docx and PDF content is inconsistent across all shortlisted properties.
  > 💡 Source verified active listings and ensure uniform, complete property data across all profiles.

### ❌ `6074bba3…` — score 3/10
- PDF contains multiple placeholder fields instead of completed data.
- Comparable sales and active listings are not populated with real market data.
- Graphs are referenced but not embedded with actual values.
  > 💡 Complete the CMA by populating all fields with real comps, pricing data, and embedded graphs.

### ✅ `5ad0c554…` — score 8/10
- Brochure does not explicitly identify or cite specific items from the 132 Things Realtors Do list.
- Double-sided layout is implied but not clearly structured or labeled as front and back.
  > 💡 Add explicit references to selected numbered items from the 132 Things list and label brochure sides.

### ❌ `11593a50…` — score 2/10
- No eligible homes identified or listed despite task requiring MLSLI-based selection.
- Tour PDF is one page without photos, tables, or required columns.
- Dates are incorrect and an unrequested DOCX file was produced.
  > 💡 Research MLSLI for active listings and deliver the specified two-page tour PDF and one-page map PDF with correct dates.

### ✅ `94925f49…` — score 6/10
- School statistics and home listings are estimates without cited reputable sources.
- At least one report lacks a concrete nearby homes table.
- Community reviews are generic and not school-specific.
  > 💡 Add cited sources, replace estimates with verifiable data, and ensure each report includes a detailed homes table.

### ✅ `90f37ff3…` — score 7/10
- Comparable listings lack dates to confirm activity within the past three years.
- No data source citations provided for comparable rents.
- Subject property address is incomplete without a street number.
  > 💡 Add dated comparables with cited sources and provide the full subject property address.

### ✅ `d3d255b2…` — score 8/10
- Report date uses vague placeholder instead of a specific date.
- Preview shows a truncated word suggesting possible formatting or export issue.
  > 💡 Replace placeholders with finalized details and verify the PDF export for complete text integrity.

### ✅ `403b9234…` — score 7/10
- Slide content and slide count were not verified against stated requirements.
- Minor grammatical error in text response ('an 9-slide').
  > 💡 Review the PPTX to confirm slide count and required content before final submission.

### ✅ `1bff4551…` — score 5/10
- Includes a non–African American act contrary to program focus.
- Does not verify or cite Institute collection representation for most acts.
- Original song uses an unrelated placeholder YouTube link.
  > 💡 Replace non-qualifying songs, confirm collection holdings, and provide accurate links before approval.

### ✅ `650adcb1…` — score 6/10
- Sixth tab summarizing time off requests is not shown or verifiable.
- Dates with fewer than two interns working are not clearly listed.
- December sheet contains extra blank columns and an unclear key layout.
  > 💡 Add a clear sixth tab for requests and coverage gaps, and clean up the December layout.

### ✅ `01d7e53e…` — score 6/10
- Primary contact information lacks specific names, titles, phone numbers, and email addresses.
- City standard Miscellaneous contract language appears truncated and not included verbatim.
- Exhibits are referenced but not clearly attached or fully detailed.
  > 💡 Add complete contact details, insert full official contract language verbatim, and attach all referenced exhibits.

### ✅ `0ec25916…` — score 5/10
- PDF is two pages instead of the required single page.
- Layout is not a clear two-column by four-row table.
- DOCX file lacks the full SBAR table content.
  > 💡 Condense content into a single-page PDF with a clearly defined two-column, four-row table.

### ✅ `116e791e…` — score 7/10
- PDF is two pages, not one page as required.
- Text response lacks the actual nursing care plan content.
- Produced an extra DOCX file not requested.
  > 💡 Condense the PDF to one page and include the full care plan content in the response.

### ✅ `dd724c67…` — score 6/10
- Facility list is non-exhaustive despite requirement to include all Long Island hospitals and rehab facilities.
- Output explicitly states lack of internet research, conflicting with task instructions.
- TFU guide lacks clear citation and full condition list from CMS PY2025 methodology.
  > 💡 Expand the facility list via comprehensive research and align the TFU guide explicitly to CMS PY2025 specifications.

### ❌ `7151c60a…` — score 3/10
- Pre-screening checklist lacks required table, dates sent/received, staff initials, page numbers, and logo.
- Fax cover sheet missing sender/recipient fields, date, subject line, and contact details.
- Checklist does not state internal-only completion or include required patient information elements.
  > 💡 Revise both documents to explicitly include all specified fields, tables, logos, and regulatory checklist elements.

### ❌ `90edba97…` — score 2/10
- Did not complete the required Monthly Tracker- Patient Lab Results spreadsheet.
- No patient lab values or monthly medication adjustments were entered.
- Produced substitute files not requested in the original task.
  > 💡 Complete the specified Monthly Tracker Excel using provided lab reports and standing order protocols.

### ✅ `91060ff0…` — score 7/10
- Non-pharmacological and preventative strategies section is missing or minimally addressed.
- No references or citations are displayed on the poster.
- Visual elements like icons or tables are limited and underdeveloped.
  > 💡 Add a prevention section, include citations, and enhance visuals with tables or icons.

### ✅ `8384083a…` — score 6/10
- DOCX file lacks required medication details and tables.
- Miebo days’ supply calculation is incorrect based on drops per bottle.
- DOCX and PDF content are inconsistent in completeness.
  > 💡 Populate the DOCX fully and correct Miebo’s days’ supply calculation using realistic drop counts.

### ✅ `045aba2e…` — score 6/10
- Checklists are overly high-level and miss many California Board of Pharmacy required elements.
- No explicit alignment or citations to the 2025 Lawbook or Self-Assessment sections.
- Weekly and monthly checklist content appears minimal and not comprehensive.
  > 💡 Expand each checklist with law-specific items and cite relevant California Board of Pharmacy requirements.

### ❌ `f2986c1f…` — score 3/10
- Medications were not identified using Drugs.com as required.
- Spreadsheet contains only placeholder NA values without image-based analysis.
- No MedlinePlus counseling links were provided.
  > 💡 Request image access and perform actual pill identification using Drugs.com before completing the spreadsheet.

### ❌ `ffed32d8…` — score 2/10
- No cost, reimbursement, or revenue calculations were performed for any medication.
- Comparative table and per-drug analysis required by task are completely missing.
- Revenue values are zero and unsupported by provided Wholesale and Reimbursement files.
  > 💡 Redo the analysis using provided pricing files and include a complete per-drug comparative revenue table.

### ✅ `b3573f20…` — score 6/10
- PDF is five pages, not the required three pages.
- Text response describes intent instead of summarizing actual delivered content.
  > 💡 Reduce and condense content so the PDF is exactly three pages long.

### ✅ `a69be28f…` — score 8/10
- Text response is generic and lacks specific analytical insights.
  > 💡 Include a brief written summary of key regional fit trends and implications.

### ✅ `788d2bc6…` — score 6/10
- TikTok Shop, influencer marketing, analytics, and review generation services are not evidenced in the preview.
- Visual elements are not apparent in the PDF preview, risking a text-heavy deck.
- Alignment with SERVICESV5.docx cannot be verified from the provided content.
  > 💡 Add clearly labeled TikTok-focused slides with visuals and confirm explicit alignment to SERVICESV5 services.

### ✅ `74ed1dc7…` — score 9/10
- Proposal lacks explicit reporting fields or KPIs tied to each new order type.
  > 💡 Add a brief section defining key reporting attributes and owners for each order type.

### ✅ `ab81b076…` — score 8/10
- Visual example images are referenced but not visibly embedded in the PDF pages.
  > 💡 Embed the example images directly within the PDF near the related instruction steps.

### ✅ `7ed932dd…` — score 6/10
- First data row contains blank Product SKU and empty fields.
- Dates include timestamps instead of clear calendar dates.
- No visible evidence of highlighted rows for required pallets or early delivery.
  > 💡 Clean the dataset, normalize dates, and clearly apply required row highlighting.

### ❌ `105f8ad0…` — score 3/10
- No actual competitor research or documented MSRPs from Sephora, Ulta, or Macy’s.
- All SKUs incorrectly mapped to Jumbo_5oz size tier regardless of bottle size.
- Recommended MSRP values are missing despite calculations being required.
  > 💡 Rebuild the model using researched competitor MSRPs and correct size, concentration, and pricing calculations per SKU.

### ❌ `b57efde3…` — score 4/10
- Did not review or use the official Aqua Nor 2025 exhibitor list.
- Prospecting list contains only a few example companies instead of comprehensive leads.
- Spreadsheet includes placeholder content rather than completed research.
  > 💡 Populate the spreadsheet by systematically reviewing all relevant exhibitors from the official Aqua Nor 2025 list.

### ❌ `15d37511…` — score 4/10
- Pricing and cost fields are blank, so no revenue or margin projection is provided.
- Projected quantities incorrectly assume 2,000 units per product instead of total combined volume.
- Total gross margin is not calculated, only labeled.
  > 💡 Populate spreadsheet with actual pricing from the reference email and compute correct totals using the stated volume.

### ✅ `bb863dd9…` — score 8/10
- Excel sheet contains unnamed or empty columns reducing clarity.
  > 💡 Clean up column structure and add a quotation total summary row.

### ✅ `fe0d3941…` — score 7/10
- An extra DOCX survey file was produced but not requested.
- Survey PDF contains three pages instead of exactly two specified pages.
- PDF page separation and titles do not strictly match instructions.
  > 💡 Remove the DOCX file and ensure the survey PDF has exactly two correctly titled pages.

### ❌ `6a900a40…` — score 4/10
- Transport options with freight costs and grand totals are missing.
- Item remarks lack transit times and suitability reasoning for each transport mode.
- General remark does not show freight validity and reconfirmation in red font.
  > 💡 Revise the Excel to add all three freight options with costs, remarks, and required general notes.

### ✅ `9efbcd35…` — score 8/10
- Specific MSCI index return figures and percentages are not explicitly cited.
- Sources like MSCI, FT, and WSJ are referenced but not formally cited.
- Some sections remain high-level and could use more quantitative detail.
  > 💡 Add specific MSCI return figures and brief source citations to strengthen credibility.

### ✅ `1d4672c8…` — score 5/10
- Used simulated data instead of extracting returns from MSCI as required.
- Excel workbook lacks a correlation matrix tab.
- Correlation analysis relies on non-live data, reducing professional validity.
  > 💡 Use actual MSCI monthly return data and add a dedicated correlation matrix worksheet.

### ❌ `4de6a529…` — score 4/10
- DOCX file lacks required tables and detailed content.
- PDF tables are truncated and missing several required sub-asset classes.
- Column headers and sections are incomplete or improperly formatted.
  > 💡 Rebuild complete tables in both files with all required asset classes, columns, and justifications.

### ✅ `4c4dc603…` — score 5/10
- PDF is two pages, not a concise one-page summary.
- Salient numbers and key economics contain placeholders or lack specific figures.
- Key team profiles lack named individuals and credentials.
  > 💡 Condense to one page and add concrete fund metrics, token economics, and named team profiles.

### ✅ `bb499d9c…` — score 8/10
- Compliance section lacks specific named regulations by jurisdiction.
- Issuer process customization by issuer group is not clearly detailed.
- Unclear whether flowcharts are embedded inside the Word document.
  > 💡 Add explicit regulatory references, issuer-type distinctions, and confirm flowcharts are embedded in the DOCX.

### ✅ `5349dd7b…` — score 6/10
- Historical rate increases and flat rates are assumed, not researched via search engines.
- Use of business rates is not clearly sourced or verified.
- Text notes lack of live research, conflicting with task requirements.
  > 💡 Redo analysis using cited, researched carrier rate data from authoritative sources.

### ✅ `a4a9195c…` — score 8/10
- Limited explicit linkage to specific IPC-A-610G acceptance criteria.
- Environmental controls lack defined humidity range and monitoring method.
  > 💡 Add IPC-A-610G clause references and specify measurable environmental control limits.

### ✅ `552b7dd0…` — score 6/10
- Text response lacks actual analysis results and numerical metrics.
- No evidence the Excel incident data was reviewed or referenced.
- PPT content cannot be verified for required cost and duration statistics.
  > 💡 Include concrete metrics and insights derived directly from the spreadsheet and summarize key findings.

### ❌ `11dcc268…` — score 3/10
- Assigned "Moved To" locations are missing and not cross-referenced.
- Template headers and required columns are incorrect or blank.
- Special handling for partial receipt of P11-P09457-01 is missing.
  > 💡 Rebuild the report using the exact template and fully cross-reference all receipts to assigned locations.

### ❌ `76418a2c…` — score 3/10
- Manifest lacks required columns like pick ticket, customer, weight, and labeled costs.
- Weights are zero and shipping methods not determined from shipping parameters.
- Data appears placeholder and not derived from provided pick tickets or TMS files.
  > 💡 Recreate the manifest using actual pick ticket data and shipping parameters with correct headers and calculations.

### ❌ `0e386e32…` — score 3/10
- ZIP size suggests missing real source files and incomplete scaffold.
- Smart contracts, zkSNARK circuits, and frontend code are not verifiable.
- Claims full implementation but provides only high-level description.
  > 💡 Provide a verifiable ZIP with complete, non-placeholder source files for all described components.

### ❌ `7de33b48…` — score 4/10
- Zip size is too small to plausibly include component, tests, package.json, and README.
- No evidence provided that required WCAG ARIA22 tests are implemented.
- Actual file contents were not documented or verified against requirements.
  > 💡 Include and document full source, tests, and supporting files, and verify contents explicitly.

### ❌ `4122f866…` — score 4/10
- Terraform lacks detailed SES DKIM, MAIL FROM, and email template resources.
- README omits API Gateway route, stage details, and environment variable configuration.
- Lambda implementation details for reCAPTCHA validation and SES templated email are unverified.
  > 💡 Expand Terraform and documentation to explicitly cover all required SES, API Gateway, and Lambda behaviors.

### ✅ `2c249e0f…` — score 7/10
- Resumable upload mechanism lacks explicit chunking or byte-range semantics.
- Insight data prioritization is described but not clearly enforced via API contracts.
- Security and authentication schemes are not defined in the OpenAPI spec.
  > 💡 Add explicit resumable upload details, priority enforcement fields, and authentication definitions.

## Failure Analysis

The hard failures are dominated by brittle spreadsheet/schema assumptions rather than broad reasoning collapse. Eight of the ten errors are exact-header or type-conversion crashes in Excel/Pandas flows: b7a5912e expected a Total days column, 87da214f expected Policy Type/Reason/Circumstance/Amount/Month, 327fbc21 expected Store ID#/ACTIVE STATUS/NOTES, a0552909 could not find Lab Name, f841ddcf expected Actual Ship Date, d7cfae6f expected YTD_2023, 19403010 expected Function, and a73fbc98 tried to cast NaN in # of Tables to int. The remaining two errors were an execution/library mismatch in 4d61a19a and a raw syntax failure in 854f3814. This cluster is heavily concentrated in Wholesale spreadsheet roles and other clerical/ops Excel tasks, which explains why Wholesale had the weakest completion even though many text-heavy sectors were stable.

A second pattern is deliverable substitution: the system often produced a polished wrapper document, template, or plan instead of the required finished artifact. This is clearest in media tasks such as e222075d, c94452e4, 75401f7c, and a941b6d8, where storyboards, proxy plans, or turnover packages were delivered instead of the required MP4/VFX outputs. The same behavior appears in software/developer tasks 0e386e32, 7de33b48, and 4122f866, where ZIP contents were too small or unverifiable relative to the claimed implementation, and in quantitative/engineering tasks like 8079e27d, c7d83f01, 46fc494e, and 3940b7e7, where blank templates or placeholder analyses replaced actual computations. Successful high-QA tasks were much more common when the deliverable was bounded prose or a straightforward policy/report artifact, such as a328feea, 7bbfcfe9, dfb4e0cd, or 74ed1dc7.

A third failure mode is dependence on live research or primary-source retrieval. Low-QA outputs repeatedly missed current public data, verified listings, or authoritative regulatory details: 02aa1805 did not retrieve Illinois EPA well data, 11593a50 did not identify MLSLI homes, 6074bba3 left CMA placeholders instead of real comps, 8079e27d omitted public S&P 500 valuation data, 81db15ff appears to have inaccurate NP/PA state-law assumptions, b57efde3 did not review the Aqua Nor exhibitor list, and f2986c1f did not perform actual Drugs.com identification. This helps explain the gap between high completion and middling confidence in sectors like Health Care and Real Estate: the run often created a file, but not one grounded in the requested external evidence.

Retry behavior improved completion more than content quality. All ten hard-failed tasks had already been retried and still failed, so the retry loop did not fix the underlying schema/library issues. Many retried successes also remained weak, including 7b08cd4d, ee09d943, 5f6c57dd, 0353ee0c, 75401f7c, and a941b6d8, showing that retries often recovered enough to emit a deliverable but not enough to satisfy the task. Latency does not explain the pattern: long tasks can be strong (6974adea, c9bf9801) or weak (c7d83f01, 85d95ce5), and some very short runs are clearly placeholder-like (f2986c1f, 11dcc268). The more predictive variables are deliverable type, need for exact workbook parsing, and need for live external evidence.

## Recommendations

First, harden the spreadsheet execution path. For Excel-heavy sectors, add a mandatory workbook-profiling prepass before code generation: enumerate sheet names, detect candidate header rows, normalize header text, fuzzy-match synonyms, inspect dtypes, and produce a schema map for the model to consume. That one change would likely prevent most hard failures in b7a5912e, 87da214f, 327fbc21, a0552909, f841ddcf, d7cfae6f, 19403010, and a73fbc98. In model-config terms, spreadsheet/package runs should default to a shared helper library rather than ad hoc find_col logic in each solution. If a schema still cannot be resolved, the system should degrade gracefully by generating a diagnostic tab or exception report instead of terminating the task.

Second, create artifact-specific routes and validators for media, code, and computational deliverables. The current system is too willing to substitute planning documents for the requested artifact. For film/video tasks like e222075d, c94452e4, 75401f7c, and a941b6d8, require an automated postcheck on file existence, codec, duration, and resolution before completion is accepted. For software tasks like 0e386e32, 7de33b48, and 4122f866, require a manifest, minimum source-file count/size thresholds, and at least one static validation step such as lint/tests/openapi validation. For computational engineering tasks like 46fc494e and c7d83f01, require numerical outputs, plots, or populated result tables, not just narrative. Prompting should explicitly forbid proxy plans unless the user asked for them.

Third, strengthen retrieval and source-attestation for tasks that depend on current public information. A browsing or retrieval substep should be mandatory for research-driven packages, with the prompt requiring a source log before drafting the final file. This would directly target the weak patterns in 02aa1805, 8079e27d, 6074bba3, 11593a50, 81db15ff, b57efde3, and f2986c1f. Prompt engineering should also ban representative examples, assumed data, and unlabeled placeholders whenever the task explicitly asks for live listings, official forms, regulatory rules, or public-market data. Where possible, add sector-specific retrieval templates: MLS/real-estate, healthcare regulation, financial market data, and trade-show/exhibitor research each need different source expectations.

Fourth, tune QA thresholds and retries to be deliverable-aware rather than generic. Retries should not simply rerun the same brittle approach; they should inject the first-pass failure signal back into the prompt, including detected schema, missing columns, or QA deficiencies. That would be more useful than the current retry behavior seen in 7b08cd4d, ee09d943, 5f6c57dd, 0353ee0c, 75401f7c, and a941b6d8. Add a structured pre-submit checklist for each artifact type: exact file types, page/slide counts, required tables/formulas, citation presence, no extra files, and completion of official forms rather than summaries. A practical threshold would be stricter for spreadsheet/media/research tasks than for simple narrative docs, since the strongest sectors already show that bounded document work can pass reliably without excessive rework.

## Deliverable Files

- `83d10b06…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 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): 4 file(s)
- `99ac6944…` (Information): 5 file(s)
- `f9a1c16c…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `38889c3b…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `ff85ee58…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `4b894ae3…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `1b1ade2d…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `93b336f3…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `15ddd28d…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `24d1e93f…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `05389f78…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `575f8679…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `a74ead3b…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `bbe0a93b…` (Government): 6 file(s)
- `85d95ce5…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `76d10872…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `36d567ba…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `7bbfcfe9…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `2696757c…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `dfb4e0cd…` (Government): 1 file(s)
- `4c18ebae…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `cebf301e…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `c2e8f271…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `2ea2e5b5…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 5 file(s)
- `c357f0e2…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `a45bc83b…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 4 file(s)
- `a10ec48c…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `fccaa4a1…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 3 file(s)
- `f5d428fd…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 9 file(s)
- `2fa8e956…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `0e4fe8cd…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `a0ef404e…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 1 file(s)
- `aa071045…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `476db143…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 4 file(s)
- `61f546a8…` (Real Estate and Rental and Leasing): 2 file(s)
- `f3351922…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `61717508…` (Finance and Insurance): 4 file(s)
- `0ed38524…` (Finance and Insurance): 4 file(s)
- `d025a41c…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `401a07f1…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `afe56d05…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `9a8c8e28…` (Information): 6 file(s)
- `3a4c347c…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `ec2fccc9…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `8c8fc328…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `e222075d…` (Information): 5 file(s)
- `c94452e4…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `75401f7c…` (Information): 3 file(s)
- `a941b6d8…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `8079e27d…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `e21cd746…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `9e8607e7…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `c7d83f01…` (Finance and Insurance): 5 file(s)
- `46b34f78…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `a1963a68…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `5f6c57dd…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `b39a5aa7…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `b78fd844…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `4520f882…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `ec591973…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `62f04c2f…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `3f821c2d…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `e996036e…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `6dcae3f5…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `1aecc095…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 3 file(s)
- `0353ee0c…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `40a8c4b1…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `4d1a8410…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 3 file(s)
- `8c823e32…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `eb54f575…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `11e1b169…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `a95a5829…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `22c0809b…` (Government): 2 file(s)
- `bf68f2ad…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `efca245f…` (Manufacturing): 2 file(s)
- `9e39df84…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `68d8d901…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `1752cb53…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `bd72994f…` (Retail Trade): 3 file(s)
- `211d0093…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `d4525420…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `45c6237b…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `cecac8f9…` (Retail Trade): 4 file(s)
- `8f9e8bcd…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `0fad6023…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `02314fc6…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `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): 10 file(s)
- `46fc494e…` (Manufacturing): 3 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): 2 file(s)
- `61b0946a…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 3 file(s)
- `61e7b9c6…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `c9bf9801…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 3 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): 5 file(s)
- `4b98ccce…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 3 file(s)
- `60221cd0…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `ef8719da…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `3baa0009…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `5d0feb24…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `6974adea…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `1a78e076…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `1b9ec237…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `0112fc9b…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `772e7524…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 1 file(s)
- `e6429658…` (Health Care and Social Assistance): 2 file(s)
- `b5d2e6f1…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `47ef842d…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `1137e2bb…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `c3525d4d…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `9a0d8d36…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `664a42e5…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `feb5eefc…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `3600de06…` (Finance and Insurance): 1 file(s)
- `c657103b…` (Finance and Insurance): 2 file(s)
- `ae0c1093…` (Retail Trade): 4 file(s)
- `f9f82549…` (Retail Trade): 8 file(s)
- `57b2cdf2…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `84322284…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `a46d5cd2…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `6241e678…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `e14e32ba…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `b1a79ce1…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `e4f664ea…` (Information): 2 file(s)
- `a079d38f…` (Information): 1 file(s)
- `02aa1805…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
- `fd6129bd…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
- `ce864f41…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
- `58ac1cc5…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 4 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): 12 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): 3 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)
- `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): 2 file(s)
- `91060ff0…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `8384083a…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `045aba2e…` (Retail Trade): 6 file(s)
- `f2986c1f…` (Retail Trade): 1 file(s)
- `ffed32d8…` (Retail Trade): 2 file(s)
- `b3573f20…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `a69be28f…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `788d2bc6…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `74ed1dc7…` (Wholesale Trade): 1 file(s)
- `69a8ef86…` (Wholesale Trade): 2 file(s)
- `ab81b076…` (Wholesale Trade): 4 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)
- `11dcc268…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `76418a2c…` (Manufacturing): 1 file(s)
- `0e386e32…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `7de33b48…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 1 file(s)
- `4122f866…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 6 file(s)
- `2c249e0f…` (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services): 2 file(s)
