← Heatmap / GLM 5.3 Flash · Task 26
GLM 5.3 Flash · Tool use · Task 26 (Traps, missing gross pay)
Mean 50.0%
| Field | Expected | Rollout #1 (-50%) | Rollout #2 (100%) | Rollout #3 (100%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| decision | clarify | (malformed) | clarify | clarify |
| reason code | MISSING_GROSS_PAY | (malformed) | MISSING_GROSS_PAY | MISSING_GROSS_PAY |
| clauses | R1 R7 | (malformed) | R1 R7 | R1 R7 |
Prompt
Process this monthly payroll record under the supplied rulebook. Return the R6 or R7 JSON answer. Retrieve the case inputs with list_documents and read_document. Reference rows are available only through lookup_reference. Use calculate for exact decimal arithmetic.
Rollouts
Rollout #1 -50.0% malformed · 2 tool calls · 5.3s · $0.0010
| Component | Score | Clauses |
|---|---|---|
| decision | 0.0% | R1 R7 |
| exact | 0.0% | R1 R7 |
| field accuracy | 0.0% | R1 R7 |
| citations | 0.0% | R1 R7 |
Assistant
list_documents()Reasoning
Let me start by listing the documents to get the case inputs.
Tool
[
{"id": "212615d32af28990-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Assistant
read_document(document_id="212615d32af28990-payroll")Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"payroll_month": "2026-09"}
}
Assistant
```json
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_GROSS_PAY",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll record for 2026-09 is missing the required gross_pay (explicit null). Per R7 check order, missing gross_pay blocks calculation before any reference-row evaluation; please supply the employee's gross pay for 2026-09 so the payslip can be calculated."
}
```
Reasoning
The payroll record has only `payroll_month: "2026-09"` and no `gross_pay`. Per R7 order: 1. Missing `gross_pay`: return `decision: "clarify"` and `reason_code: "MISSING_GROSS_PAY"`, citing R1 and R7. The month 2026-09 is covered (only 2026 is covered), but the first check is missing gross_pay. So the answer is clarify with MISSING_GROSS_PAY. Per the rules: "For these cases do not return calculated monetary fields. Missing required values include explicit null." Hmm — "Missing required values include explicit null" — that means in the JSON, missing required values should be explicit null? But the allowed answer fields for clarify are: decision, reason_code, clauses. So I should only include those fields. The note about explicit null may refer to cases where monetary fields are included... Actually the R7 text says "For these cases do not return calculated monetary fields. Missing required values include explicit null." The allowed answer fields for clarify are decision, reason_code, clauses (plus optional explanation). So I'll return just those. Should I check the reference table? The month 2026-09 is within 2026, which is covered. But since gross_pay is missing, the first check triggers. I don't need lookup_reference for the clarify answer. But maybe I should verify the month has a reference row? The check order says: 1. Missing gross_pay first. So it's clarify MISSING_GROSS_PAY regardless. I could still call lookup_reference to confirm 2026-09 exists, but it's not needed for the answer. The instructions say to use lookup_reference for reference rows — but for a clarify, no calculation is needed. I'll skip unnecessary calls. Actually, to be safe, maybe verify the month is covered — but even if it weren't, check order 1 comes first. The answer is the same. I'll just answer. Citations: R1 and R7. Include a short explanation naming the unresolved blocker and asking for its resolution.
Rollout #2 100.0% passed · 2 tool calls · 5.8s · $0.0011
| Component | Score | Clauses |
|---|---|---|
| decision | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
| exact | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
| field accuracy | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
| citations | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
| explanation | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
Assistant
list_documents()Reasoning
Let me start by listing the documents to see what inputs we have.
Tool
[
{"id": "212615d32af28990-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Assistant
read_document(document_id="212615d32af28990-payroll")Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"payroll_month": "2026-09"}
}
Assistant
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_GROSS_PAY",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll record for 2026-09 contains only payroll_month and is missing the required gross_pay. R1 requires gross_pay for every calculation and R7(1) directs clarification with MISSING_GROSS_PAY. Please supply the employee's gross pay for 2026-09 so the payslip can be calculated."
}
Reasoning
The payroll record only has `payroll_month: "2026-09"` and no `gross_pay`. Per R7, check order: 1. Missing `gross_pay`: return `decision: "clarify"` and `reason_code: "MISSING_GROSS_PAY"`, citing R1 and R7. So the answer is clarify with MISSING_GROSS_PAY, citing R1 and R7. No monetary fields for clarification. Include a short explanation naming the unresolved blocker and asking for its resolution. The record has payroll_month, so we don't check month first — the order says gross_pay check first (step 1). Payroll month is present (2026-09), so step 2 doesn't trigger. Step 1 triggers: missing gross_pay. Answer fields: decision, reason_code, clauses, optional explanation.
Rollout #3 100.0% passed · 2 tool calls · 5.2s · $0.0009
| Component | Score | Clauses |
|---|---|---|
| decision | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
| exact | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
| field accuracy | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
| citations | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
| explanation | 100.0% | R1 R7 |
Assistant
list_documents()Reasoning
Let me start by listing the documents to get the case inputs.
Tool
[
{"id": "212615d32af28990-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Assistant
read_document(document_id="212615d32af28990-payroll")Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"payroll_month": "2026-09"}
}
Assistant
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_GROSS_PAY",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll record for 2026-09 contains no gross_pay value, which is required under R1 before any calculation. Please supply the employee's gross pay for 2026-09 so the payslip can be computed."
}
Reasoning
The payroll record only contains `payroll_month: "2026-09"` and is missing `gross_pay`. Per R7, check 1: Missing `gross_pay` → return `decision: "clarify"` and `reason_code: "MISSING_GROSS_PAY"`, citing R1 and R7. The check order: first missing gross_pay, then missing payroll_month, etc. Payroll month is present and 2026-09 is covered (only 2026 is covered). But gross_pay is missing, so clarify with MISSING_GROSS_PAY. I should not return calculated monetary fields. For clarification include a short explanation naming the unresolved blocker and asking for its resolution. Fields allowed: decision, reason_code, clauses, and optional explanation.