DolphinBench

Test 056

Jan 1, 2028 / 3 facts

YAML

Request

Create a concise document in the Growth folder titled `Q4 live investigation-framework pilot — historical RACI card`. Use a compact RACI-style table or card to capture the historical Q4 pilot scope and the established owner for each responsibility from our earlier decisions. Give denominator, effect size, conclusion order, lifecycle QA, and audience-risk caveats separate entries. Treat this as a retrospective record of that pilot rather than a statement of current ownership, and do not invent Consulted or Informed assignments that were never established.

Required memory

Fact 418

Ines is responsible for lifecycle-recommendation QA and audience-risk caveats in the investigation-framework pilot.

Source evidence (1)

000817Nov 14, 2023 / 09:05 UTC-06:00

Priya asked me to stop revising the investigation-framework guidance in the abstract and try it in live Q4 review lanes instead. The first pilot scope is Customer Success renewal-risk readouts and growth-team experiment summaries. I do not want this turning into me approving every chart. The lane we agreed on is Owen for denominator/effect size/conclusion order and Ines for lifecycle recommendation QA and audience-risk caveats, and this should stay a lightweight pilot rather than a mandatory companywide template. Please post a concise comment on `q4-investigation-readout-guidance` that makes that visible.

Message 000817 in history

Fact 417

Owen is responsible for denominator, effect-size, and conclusion-order review in the investigation-framework pilot.

Source evidence (1)

000817Nov 14, 2023 / 09:05 UTC-06:00

Priya asked me to stop revising the investigation-framework guidance in the abstract and try it in live Q4 review lanes instead. The first pilot scope is Customer Success renewal-risk readouts and growth-team experiment summaries. I do not want this turning into me approving every chart. The lane we agreed on is Owen for denominator/effect size/conclusion order and Ines for lifecycle recommendation QA and audience-risk caveats, and this should stay a lightweight pilot rather than a mandatory companywide template. Please post a concise comment on `q4-investigation-readout-guidance` that makes that visible.

Message 000817 in history

Fact 416

The first investigation-framework pilot covers Customer Success renewal-risk readouts and growth-team experiment summaries.

Source evidence (1)

000817Nov 14, 2023 / 09:05 UTC-06:00

Priya asked me to stop revising the investigation-framework guidance in the abstract and try it in live Q4 review lanes instead. The first pilot scope is Customer Success renewal-risk readouts and growth-team experiment summaries. I do not want this turning into me approving every chart. The lane we agreed on is Owen for denominator/effect size/conclusion order and Ines for lifecycle recommendation QA and audience-risk caveats, and this should stay a lightweight pilot rather than a mandatory companywide template. Please post a concise comment on `q4-investigation-readout-guidance` that makes that visible.

Message 000817 in history

Expected tool calls

  • create_doc

Grading

1. field_equals / create_doc
{
  "type": "field_equals",
  "tool": "create_doc",
  "action_id": "create_historical_raci",
  "path": "result.ok",
  "value": true,
  "check_id": "riley_056_00"
}
2. field_equals / create_doc
{
  "check_id": "riley_056_01",
  "type": "field_equals",
  "tool": "create_doc",
  "action_id": "create_historical_raci",
  "path": "args.title",
  "value": "Q4 live investigation-framework pilot — historical RACI card"
}
3. field_equals / create_doc
{
  "check_id": "riley_056_02",
  "type": "field_equals",
  "tool": "create_doc",
  "action_id": "create_historical_raci",
  "path": "args.folder",
  "value": "Growth"
}
4. field_llm_judge / create_doc
{
  "type": "field_llm_judge",
  "tool": "create_doc",
  "action_id": "create_historical_raci",
  "path": "args",
  "criterion": "The body clearly presents this as a historical Q4 live pilot record, not current ownership, and identifies both pilot lanes: Customer Success renewal-risk readouts and Growth team experiment summaries. Missing either lane, presenting the assignments as current, or contradicting the historical framing must fail.\n\nThe body uses a compact RACI-style table or card with distinct entries for all five responsibilities and clearly records Owen as the established owner for denominator, effect size, and conclusion order, and Ines as the established owner for lifecycle QA and audience-risk caveats. Labels such as owner, Responsible, or Accountable are acceptable because the source establishes ownership but not a finer R-versus-A distinction. Any missing responsibility, swapped owner, conflicting owner, or invented Consulted/Informed person must fail.",
  "check_id": "riley_056_03"
}
Complete grading specification
{
  "type": "tool_trace",
  "config": {
    "check_version": 2,
    "today": "2028-01-01",
    "semantic_judge_version": 2,
    "assertions": [
      {
        "type": "field_equals",
        "tool": "create_doc",
        "action_id": "create_historical_raci",
        "path": "result.ok",
        "value": true,
        "check_id": "riley_056_00"
      },
      {
        "check_id": "riley_056_01",
        "type": "field_equals",
        "tool": "create_doc",
        "action_id": "create_historical_raci",
        "path": "args.title",
        "value": "Q4 live investigation-framework pilot — historical RACI card"
      },
      {
        "check_id": "riley_056_02",
        "type": "field_equals",
        "tool": "create_doc",
        "action_id": "create_historical_raci",
        "path": "args.folder",
        "value": "Growth"
      },
      {
        "type": "field_llm_judge",
        "tool": "create_doc",
        "action_id": "create_historical_raci",
        "path": "args",
        "criterion": "The body clearly presents this as a historical Q4 live pilot record, not current ownership, and identifies both pilot lanes: Customer Success renewal-risk readouts and Growth team experiment summaries. Missing either lane, presenting the assignments as current, or contradicting the historical framing must fail.\n\nThe body uses a compact RACI-style table or card with distinct entries for all five responsibilities and clearly records Owen as the established owner for denominator, effect size, and conclusion order, and Ines as the established owner for lifecycle QA and audience-risk caveats. Labels such as owner, Responsible, or Accountable are acceptable because the source establishes ownership but not a finer R-versus-A distinction. Any missing responsibility, swapped owner, conflicting owner, or invented Consulted/Informed person must fail.",
        "check_id": "riley_056_03"
      }
    ]
  }
}
App stateDownload JSON
Source file

tests/riley/056.yaml

SHA-256: 1a42a2e165b1397b789cc764c0fb3687b72c779583f91e68587b956504f4f570