Test 139 for Riley Tanaka

Request

Please append a compact calibration example to document ID `doc_1832457600001`. Use the March 8 onboarding-trigger launch example and record the actual QA-pass disagreement, the review depth that was approved, how the disagreement and execution went interpersonally, and whether shipment had any send or template-rendering failures. Preserve the existing document content.

Required memory

Fact 331

In the March 8, 2023 1:1 about onboarding-trigger email QA, Ines wanted three QA passes, but Riley Tanaka approved two; the disagreement reflected different risk tolerances.

Source evidence (1)

000081Mar 8, 2023 / 15:00 UTC-06:00

on the Ines 1:1, mostly template QA mechanics. onboarding-trigger email, subject/body/fallbacks plus the event mapping check before flagging it on. tiny disagreement: Ines wanted 3 QA passes, I signed off on 2 -- not messy, just different risk tolerance. Ines still did the work. shipped fine after, no weirdness in the send or template render.

Message 000081 in history

Fact 332

Ines performed the onboarding-trigger email QA, covering the subject, body, fallbacks, and event mapping before enablement.

Source evidence (1)

000081Mar 8, 2023 / 15:00 UTC-06:00

on the Ines 1:1, mostly template QA mechanics. onboarding-trigger email, subject/body/fallbacks plus the event mapping check before flagging it on. tiny disagreement: Ines wanted 3 QA passes, I signed off on 2 -- not messy, just different risk tolerance. Ines still did the work. shipped fine after, no weirdness in the send or template render.

Message 000081 in history

Fact 333

The onboarding-trigger email shipped without send or template-render issues.

Source evidence (1)

000081Mar 8, 2023 / 15:00 UTC-06:00

on the Ines 1:1, mostly template QA mechanics. onboarding-trigger email, subject/body/fallbacks plus the event mapping check before flagging it on. tiny disagreement: Ines wanted 3 QA passes, I signed off on 2 -- not messy, just different risk tolerance. Ines still did the work. shipped fine after, no weirdness in the send or template render.

Message 000081 in history

Expected tool calls

update_doc

Grading

1. field_equals / update_doc

{
  "type": "field_equals",
  "tool": "update_doc",
  "action_id": "append_calibration_example",
  "path": "result.ok",
  "value": true,
  "check_id": "riley_139_00"
}

2. field_equals / update_doc

{
  "type": "field_equals",
  "tool": "update_doc",
  "action_id": "append_calibration_example",
  "path": "args.doc_id",
  "value": "doc_1832457600001",
  "check_id": "riley_139_01"
}

3. field_equals / update_doc

{
  "type": "field_equals",
  "tool": "update_doc",
  "action_id": "append_calibration_example",
  "path": "args.mode",
  "value": "append",
  "check_id": "riley_139_02"
}

4. field_llm_judge / update_doc

{
  "type": "field_llm_judge",
  "tool": "update_doc",
  "action_id": "append_calibration_example",
  "path": "args",
  "criterion": "The appended text says Ines wanted three QA passes and two were approved because of different risk tolerances. It says Ines completed QA of the subject, body, fallbacks, and event mapping before enablement, and the email shipped without send or template-rendering failures.",
  "check_id": "riley_139_03"
}

Complete grading specification

{
  "type": "tool_trace",
  "config": {
    "check_version": 2,
    "today": "2028-01-01",
    "semantic_judge_version": 2,
    "assertions": [
      {
        "type": "field_equals",
        "tool": "update_doc",
        "action_id": "append_calibration_example",
        "path": "result.ok",
        "value": true,
        "check_id": "riley_139_00"
      },
      {
        "type": "field_equals",
        "tool": "update_doc",
        "action_id": "append_calibration_example",
        "path": "args.doc_id",
        "value": "doc_1832457600001",
        "check_id": "riley_139_01"
      },
      {
        "type": "field_equals",
        "tool": "update_doc",
        "action_id": "append_calibration_example",
        "path": "args.mode",
        "value": "append",
        "check_id": "riley_139_02"
      },
      {
        "type": "field_llm_judge",
        "tool": "update_doc",
        "action_id": "append_calibration_example",
        "path": "args",
        "criterion": "The appended text says Ines wanted three QA passes and two were approved because of different risk tolerances. It says Ines completed QA of the subject, body, fallbacks, and event mapping before enablement, and the email shipped without send or template-rendering failures.",
        "check_id": "riley_139_03"
      }
    ]
  }
}