← Heatmap / GPT 5.6 Luna · Task 102
GPT 5.6 Luna* · Tool use · Task 102 (Traps, missing month)
Mean 100.0%
| Field | Expected | Rollout #1 (100%) | Rollout #2 (100%) | Rollout #3 (100%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| decision | clarify | clarify | clarify | clarify |
| reason code | MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH | MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH | MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH | MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH |
| clauses | R1 R7 | R1 R7 | 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 #1 100.0% passed · 2 tool calls · 6.6s · $0.0004
| 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()Tool
[
{"id": "dabcba8c02ca6959-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Assistant
read_document(document_id="dabcba8c02ca6959-payroll")Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"gross_pay": "5370.93", "allowed_deduction": "379.49"}
}
Assistant
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll_month is missing. Provide the payroll month in YYYY-MM format so the applicable 2026 reference row can be selected."
}
Reasoning
**Clarifying inputs** I need to clarify the missing month and ensure the order is correct after the gross exists. I wonder if I really need to look anything up? I think I need to retrieve the inputs, and it seems I've got that done. Now, I should focus on returning a JSON response and perhaps include reasoning or optional clauses to explain my process. Let's see how to structure it!
Rollout #2 100.0% passed · 2 tool calls · 6.8s · $0.0004
| 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()Tool
[
{"id": "dabcba8c02ca6959-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Assistant
read_document(document_id="dabcba8c02ca6959-payroll")Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"gross_pay": "5370.93", "allowed_deduction": "379.49"}
}
Assistant
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll_month is missing. Please provide the calendar month in YYYY-MM format."
}
Reasoning
**Clarifying missing month information** I need to address that we’re missing the month information before I can proceed with the reference lookup. It feels important to clarify this, as it’s critical for the R7 order process. Since the month is absent, there’s no need to do a lookup right now. I need to focus on ensuring that I have all the exact fields allowed in the JSON format. A brief explanation about the blockage could be helpful for resolving this issue.
Rollout #3 100.0% passed · 2 tool calls · 8.3s · $0.0004
| 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
**Gathering tools for reference** I’m considering the tools I need to use. First, it seems I should list the documents, and maybe I can check references in parallel. The user mentioned something about retrieving inputs and only referencing the lookup, so I want to make sure I follow that direction. I’ll list the documents first and then proceed with gathering information accordingly. It’s all about organizing the approach to be clear and effective!
Tool
[
{"id": "dabcba8c02ca6959-payroll", "kind": "payroll"}
]
Assistant
read_document(document_id="dabcba8c02ca6959-payroll")Tool
{
"kind": "payroll",
"record": {"gross_pay": "5370.93", "allowed_deduction": "379.49"}
}
Assistant
{
"decision": "clarify",
"reason_code": "MISSING_PAYROLL_MONTH",
"clauses": ["R1", "R7"],
"explanation": "The payroll_month is missing. Provide the calendar month in YYYY-MM format so the applicable reference row can be selected."
}
Reasoning
**Clarifying order details** I’m noticing a missing month in the order clarification. There seems to be confusion because the user mentioned that reference rows are only available for lookup, but R7 is missing a month before that. I think I need to gather JSON fields to clarify the decision regarding the reason code and include any optional explanations. I wonder if naming the blocker could help in asking for a resolution more effectively.