{
  "category": "work",
  "slug": "work-plan-service-capacity",
  "title": "An AI Service Capacity Plan for Demand Forecasts and Staffing Limits: A Failed Synthetic Benchmark at 4/10",
  "task": "create a service capacity plan from demand forecasts and staffing limits",
  "excerpt": "The completed WFT-031 synthetic field test finished at 4/10 and was not recommended: only two of five Capacity Planning checks passed after the permitted correction.",
  "tool": "Codex multi-agent session",
  "model": "Exact underlying model identifier not disclosed by the Codex session",
  "publishedAt": "2026-07-26T09:00:00+08:00",
  "durationMinutes": 0,
  "testMode": "Synthetic benchmark",
  "inputDisclosure": "Synthetic blind-test input pack WFT-031: A contact center will provide interval demand forecasts, handling times, shrinkage assumptions, and available staffing. Source facts: records WFT-031-R01 through WFT-031-R06; two fixed windows at 08:00–12:00 and 13:00–17:00; capacity limits of 24 and 32; dependency WFT-031-R04 after WFT-031-R02; and an unavailable interval for WFT-031-R05. Governing rule card: the two window limits (24 and 32). Honor fixed windows, availability, blackout periods, predecessor order, travel or rest buffers, and capacity limits before optimizing; leave an item unassigned when no feasible slot exists. The pack deliberately contains no answer key, target ranking, expected classification, expected calculation result, or row-level decision. Every person, organization, record, statement, file, and identifier is fictional; no private, production, or live data was supplied.",
  "runDisclosure": "We ran one text-only synthetic benchmark WFT-031 for “create a service capacity plan from demand forecasts and staffing limits” in a Codex multi-agent session. We froze the first response, returned only its 4 detected check failures, accepted one corrected response, and scored both against the same five static checks. No external or live action occurred: nothing was sent, published, deployed, uploaded, submitted, purchased, booked, contacted, emailed, called, messaged, executed, or changed outside the fictional text fixtures. No external, live, or production action occurred. Per-case elapsed time was not instrumented during the batch session.",
  "prompt": "Run bounded synthetic field test WFT-031. Task: create a service capacity plan from demand forecasts and staffing limits. Context: A contact center will provide interval demand forecasts, handling times, shrinkage assumptions, and available staffing. Fictional source facts: records WFT-031-R01 through WFT-031-R06; two fixed windows at 08:00–12:00 and 13:00–17:00; capacity limits of 24 and 32; dependency WFT-031-R04 after WFT-031-R02; and an unavailable interval for WFT-031-R05. Governing policy, formula, or rubric: the two window limits (24 and 32). Honor fixed windows, availability, blackout periods, predecessor order, travel or rest buffers, and capacity limits before optimizing; leave an item unassigned when no feasible slot exists. Produce a constraint table, sequenced plan, and exception register. Derive every row from the source facts and rule card; show calculations or criterion paths, cite supplied identifiers, state assumptions, surface any violated constraint, ambiguity, missing datum, or source conflict without presuming which row should pass, and abstain where evidence is incomplete. Do not infer an expected answer from the evidence plan and do not claim any live or external action. Planned verification after the frozen response: A staffing plan and independent interval calculations will verify demand coverage and stated assumptions.",
  "firstResult": "Frozen first response WFT-031 produced a constraint table, sequenced plan, and exception register for the task “create a service capacity plan from demand forecasts and staffing limits.” It treated the supplied pack as fictional and proposed this central handling: keep WFT-031-R05 outside its unavailable interval, place WFT-031-R04 only after WFT-031-R02, and flag the second window when demand 32 exceeds the stated capacity. Concrete saved artifact row WFT-031-ROW1 reads: “WFT-031-R01 | keep WFT-031-R05 outside its unavailable interval, place WFT-031-R04 only after WFT-031-R02, and flag the second window when demand 32 exceeds the stated capacity | source: supplied fictional pack | review state: first-draft.” The draft preserved the named records and separated supplied facts from assumptions; its inspectable work product also stated that no message, transaction, system change, or learner outcome had occurred. On the five predeclared static checks, it passed Capacity Planning task fidelity [WFT-031]. The audit found concrete failures: for Capacity Planning rule accuracy [WFT-031], the saved draft left the two window limits (24 and 32) without an explicit verification row; for Capacity Planning exception handling [WFT-031], the saved draft did not resolve or clearly preserve the WFT-031-R05 availability exception and the WFT-031-R02→R04 dependency; for Capacity Planning source traceability [WFT-031], the saved draft gave the central WFT-031-R05 decision no source-to-output locator; for Capacity Planning handoff usability [WFT-031], the saved draft left the constraint table, sequenced plan, and exception register without a complete reviewer handoff and acceptance marker. Those were evidence defects in the saved response, not inferred real-world failures, and they became the complete boundary of the single correction pass.",
  "correctionPrompt": "Correct only these detected WFT-031 first-draft failures, using no new input or goal: 1) Capacity Planning rule accuracy [WFT-031] — the draft left the two window limits (24 and 32) without an explicit verification row; 2) Capacity Planning exception handling [WFT-031] — the draft did not resolve or clearly preserve the WFT-031-R05 availability exception and the WFT-031-R02→R04 dependency; 3) Capacity Planning source traceability [WFT-031] — the draft gave the central WFT-031-R05 decision no source-to-output locator; 4) Capacity Planning handoff usability [WFT-031] — the draft left the constraint table, sequenced plan, and exception register without a complete reviewer handoff and acceptance marker.",
  "finalResult": "Corrected response WFT-031 retained the original fictional inputs, task boundary, and central decision: keep WFT-031-R05 outside its unavailable interval, place WFT-031-R04 only after WFT-031-R02, and flag the second window when demand 32 exceeds the stated capacity. Concrete corrected artifact row WFT-031-ROW1 reads: “WFT-031-R01 | keep WFT-031-R05 outside its unavailable interval, place WFT-031-R04 only after WFT-031-R02, and flag the second window when demand 32 exceeds the stated capacity | evidence locator: WFT-031-R01 | static status: 4/10 after one correction.” It changed only the detected failure areas, adding inspectable rows for Capacity Planning rule accuracy [WFT-031]. The frozen final text passed Capacity Planning task fidelity [WFT-031] and Capacity Planning rule accuracy [WFT-031] and still failed Capacity Planning exception handling [WFT-031], Capacity Planning source traceability [WFT-031], and Capacity Planning handoff usability [WFT-031]. The final constraint table, sequenced plan, and exception register therefore earned 4/10 from 2 passing checks; no second repair was attempted. This result reports only a bounded transcript-and-fixture evaluation. It does not claim that any workplace process, learner performance, account, device, service, or external system was actually changed, contacted, tested live, or improved.",
  "checks": [
    {
      "name": "Capacity Planning task fidelity [WFT-031]",
      "firstPass": true,
      "finalPass": true,
      "evidence": "WFT-031 static check 1 inspected the saved wording for “Capacity Planning task fidelity [WFT-031].” The first transcript contained enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture WFT-031-R05, the declared Capacity Planning rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Capacity Planning rule accuracy [WFT-031]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": true,
      "evidence": "WFT-031 static check 2 inspected the saved wording for “Capacity Planning rule accuracy [WFT-031].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture WFT-031-R05, the declared Capacity Planning rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Capacity Planning exception handling [WFT-031]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "WFT-031 static check 3 inspected the saved wording for “Capacity Planning exception handling [WFT-031].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture WFT-031-R05, the declared Capacity Planning rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Capacity Planning source traceability [WFT-031]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "WFT-031 static check 4 inspected the saved wording for “Capacity Planning source traceability [WFT-031].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture WFT-031-R05, the declared Capacity Planning rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Capacity Planning handoff usability [WFT-031]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "WFT-031 static check 5 inspected the saved wording for “Capacity Planning handoff usability [WFT-031].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture WFT-031-R05, the declared Capacity Planning rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    }
  ],
  "initialScore": 2,
  "score": 4,
  "verdict": "failed",
  "recommended": false,
  "whatWorked": [
    "WFT-031 kept “create a service capacity plan from demand forecasts and staffing limits” bounded to disclosed fictional inputs and preserved an auditable first-response snapshot.",
    "WFT-031 made the central handling—keep WFT-031-R05 outside its unavailable interval, place WFT-031-R04 only after WFT-031-R02, and flag the second window when demand 32 exceeds the stated capacity—inspectable rather than implying unseen work."
  ],
  "whatFailed": [
    "WFT-031 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Capacity Planning exception handling [WFT-031]; the record leaves that final failure visible.",
    "WFT-031 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Capacity Planning source traceability [WFT-031]; the record leaves that final failure visible.",
    "WFT-031 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Capacity Planning handoff usability [WFT-031]; the record leaves that final failure visible."
  ],
  "evidencePlan": "A staffing plan and independent interval calculations will verify demand coverage and stated assumptions.",
  "evidenceNotes": [
    "WFT-031 preserves the exact synthetic prompt, frozen first-response account, failure-only correction, corrected-response account, and five boolean decisions together.",
    "WFT-031 scores are arithmetic: 1 first-pass checks × 2 = 2/10; 2 final-pass checks × 2 = 4/10.",
    "WFT-031 evaluated only the text/static portion of the declared evidence plan—A staffing plan and independent interval calculations will verify demand coverage and stated assumptions.—and did not fabricate a live artifact, external validator, or observed outcome."
  ],
  "limitations": [
    "WFT-031 is a synthetic benchmark, so its failed verdict measures fit to the disclosed fictional Capacity Planning fixtures rather than effectiveness in a real workplace or learning setting.",
    "WFT-031 used one text-only Codex multi-agent session whose underlying model identifier was not disclosed; different prompts, models, fixtures, or human reviewers could produce different results."
  ]
}