← Heatmap / GLM 5.3 Flash · Task 79
GLM 5.3 Flash · Tool use · Task 79 (Traps, missing month)
Mean 50.0%
| Field | Expected | Rollout #1 (100%) | Rollout #2 (-50%) | Rollout #3 (100%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| decision | clarify | clarify | (malformed) | clarify |
| reason code | MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH | MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH | (malformed) | MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH |
| clauses | R1 R7 | R1 R7 | (malformed) | 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 #1 100.0% passed · 5 tool calls · 7.6s · $0.0008
| 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()lookup_reference(reference="first-half")lookup_reference(reference="second-half")Reasoning
Let me start by listing documents and looking up reference tables. Actually, I need to first list documents to find the case inputs. I can also call lookup_reference for both halves in parallel since they're independent.
Tool
[
{"id": "3306732e853a7389-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Tool
{
"reference": "first-half",
"months": ["2026-01", "2026-06"],
"rate": "0.06",
"cap": "5000.00",
"deduction": "400.00",
"free": "1200.00",
"upper": "3600.00",
"middle_rate": "0.12",
"upper_rate": "0.18"
}
Tool
{
"reference": "second-half",
"months": ["2026-07", "2026-12"],
"rate": "0.08",
"cap": "3500.00",
"deduction": "400.00",
"free": "1100.00",
"upper": "3000.00",
"middle_rate": "0.14",
"upper_rate": "0.22"
}
Assistant
read_document(document_id="3306732e853a7389-payroll")Reasoning
Now let me read the payroll document.
Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"gross_pay": "2524.56", "allowed_deduction": "208.50"}
}
Assistant
calculate(program="gross = 2524.56")Reasoning
The payroll record has gross_pay = "2524.56" and allowed_deduction = "208.50", but no payroll_month. Under R7, missing payroll_month → clarify with reason_code "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH", citing R1 and R7. Let me double-check: the record contains gross_pay and allowed_deduction only. No payroll_month, no amendment, no contract_gross_pay. So the blocker is missing payroll_month. Per R7 order: 1. Missing gross_pay — no, it's present. 2. Missing payroll_month — yes → clarify MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH. For clarification, do not return calculated monetary fields. Missing required values include explicit null — but the answer fields for clarify are decision, reason_code, clauses, and optional explanation. The instruction says "Missing required values include explicit null" — that applies to calculated cases? Actually "For these cases do not return calculated monetary fields. Missing required values include explicit null." Hmm, the clarify format only has decision, reason_code, clauses (and optional explanation). The allowed answer fields for clarify: decision, reason_code, clauses. So I'll return those plus explanation. Clauses: R1 and R7.
Tool
{
"results": {"gross": "2524.56"}
}
Assistant
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll record supplies gross_pay (2524.56) and allowed_deduction (208.50) but omits payroll_month. R1 requires a payroll month in YYYY-MM format to select the applicable reference row, and R7 step 2 mandates clarification with reason_code MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH when payroll_month is missing. No reference row can be selected and no payslip can be calculated without it; please provide the payroll month."
}
Reasoning
I did a trivial calculation but actually no calculation is needed — the blocker is missing payroll_month. The record has gross_pay = "2524.56" and allowed_deduction = "208.50" but no payroll_month. Per R7 step 2: missing payroll_month → clarify with reason_code MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH, citing R1 and R7. No monetary fields should be returned. Return JSON only, no markdown fences.
Rollout #2 -50.0% malformed · 2 tool calls · 4.1s · $0.0004
| 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 see what's in this case.
Tool
[
{"id": "3306732e853a7389-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Assistant
read_document(document_id="3306732e853a7389-payroll")Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"gross_pay": "2524.56", "allowed_deduction": "208.50"}
}
Assistant
The payroll record contains `gross_pay` and `allowed_deduction` but no `payroll_month`. Under R7, a missing payroll month must be clarified before any calculation — I cannot select a reference row (R1) without it.
```json
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll record supplies gross_pay (2524.56) and allowed_deduction (208.50) but omits payroll_month. A reference row cannot be selected without the payroll month, so the employee contribution, taxable pay, income tax, and net pay cannot be determined. Please provide the payroll month in YYYY-MM format (2026 months are covered) so the calculation can proceed."
}
```
Reasoning
The payroll record has gross_pay = 2524.56 and allowed_deduction = 208.50, but no payroll_month. According to R7, missing payroll_month requires clarification with reason_code "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH", citing R1 and R7. Let me double check the record — it only has gross_pay and allowed_deduction. No payroll_month field. So decision: clarify, reason_code: MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH, citing R1 and R7. The clarify answer fields: decision, reason_code, clauses, and optional explanation. No monetary fields should be returned. The clarification should include a short explanation naming the unresolved blocker and asking for its resolution.
Rollout #3 100.0% passed · 2 tool calls · 7.1s · $0.0010
| 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": "3306732e853a7389-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Assistant
read_document(document_id="3306732e853a7389-payroll")Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"gross_pay": "2524.56", "allowed_deduction": "208.50"}
}
Assistant
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll record supplies gross_pay (2524.56) and allowed_deduction (208.50) but omits payroll_month, which R1 requires. Without a month (YYYY-MM, 2000\u20132099) no reference row can be selected, so no payslip can be calculated. Please provide the payroll month to proceed."
}
Reasoning
The record has gross_pay = 2524.56 and allowed_deduction = 208.50, but no payroll_month. Wait, let me re-check. The record shows only gross_pay and allowed_deduction. There's no payroll_month.
Per R7: check in order:
1. Missing gross_pay: no, it's present.
2. Missing payroll_month: yes, it's missing. Return decision "clarify", reason_code "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH", citing R1 and R7.
The instructions say "Missing required values include explicit null." Hmm, "For these cases do not return calculated monetary fields. Missing required values include explicit null." That suggests for clarify, if a value is missing, include explicit null? The allowed answer fields for clarify: decision, reason_code, clauses. An optional explanation string is permitted. Hmm, "Missing required values include explicit null" — maybe means in the record, missing values are explicit null. But the answer fields for clarify are decision, reason_code, clauses, and optional explanation. I shouldn't add fields not allowed. Actually "Use exactly the required answer fields" — so decision, reason_code, clauses, plus optional explanation.
Wait, but should I check whether payroll_month is truly missing? The document only has gross_pay and allowed_deduction. No payroll_month, no contract_gross_pay, no amendment. So clarify with MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH.
Also, allowed_deduction 208.50 is present — but per R7 order, missing payroll_month check comes before deduction cap validation. Actually R7 order: 1. missing gross_pay, 2. missing payroll_month, 3. month without reference row, 4. conflicting gross_pay. The deduction cap check (R4) applies "when gross pay and a reference row both exist" — here no reference row exists since no month. So clarify.
Answer: {"decision": "clarify", "reason_code": "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH", "clauses": ["R1", "R7"], "explanation": "..."}
No need for lookup_reference or calculate since we can't select a row. I should not return monetary fields.