Work · Evidence record
What Staffing Signal Does a Noisy Call Forecast Preserve — What the Completed 8/10 Test Found
The completed WFT-060 synthetic field test reached 8/10 after one failure-only correction: 4 of five static checks passed for Demand Forecasting, while 1 check remained unresolved.
- Exact prompts and outputs
- One correction only
- Synthetic inputs disclosed
01 · The assignment
The task
forecast call volume while preserving uncertainty for staffing decisions
02 · Scope before score
Test disclosures
Input disclosure
Synthetic blind-test input pack WFT-060: A contact center will provide synthetic interval history with holidays, outages, promotions, missing periods, and an evaluation holdout. Source facts: 30-minute volumes WFT-060-V01–V12; baseline 42–78 calls; handle time 7 minutes; occupancy cap 80%; eight agents; promotion uplift 10–24%. Governing rule card: volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy. Apply every supplied rule in its stated order, abstain on incomplete rows, preserve conflicts as exceptions, and expose the source locator and arithmetic or rationale for every decision. 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.
Run disclosure
We ran one text-only synthetic benchmark WFT-060 for “forecast call volume while preserving uncertainty for staffing decisions” in a Codex multi-agent session. We froze the first response, returned only its 2 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.
- Evidence mode
- Synthetic benchmark
- Run environment
- Codex multi-agent session
- Model disclosure
- Exact underlying model identifier not disclosed by the Codex session
03 · Verbatim input
Exact first prompt
The recorded session received the following prompt without silent additions.
Run bounded synthetic field test WFT-060. Task: forecast call volume while preserving uncertainty for staffing decisions. Context: A contact center will provide synthetic interval history with holidays, outages, promotions, missing periods, and an evaluation holdout. Fictional source facts: 30-minute volumes WFT-060-V01–V12; baseline 42–78 calls; handle time 7 minutes; occupancy cap 80%; eight agents; promotion uplift 10–24%. Governing policy, formula, or rubric: volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy. Apply every supplied rule in its stated order, abstain on incomplete rows, preserve conflicts as exceptions, and expose the source locator and arithmetic or rationale for every decision. Produce a interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band. 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: Holdout error, interval coverage, peak recall, and staffing-impact calculations will compare the forecast with simple baselines.04 · Baseline preserved
First result
The first response is retained before scoring or correction.
Frozen first response WFT-060 produced a interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band for “forecast call volume while preserving uncertainty for staffing decisions.” Its first artifact row read “WFT-060-V09 | convert volume to workload, cap occupancy at 80%, show both uplift bounds, and flag V09/V10 as understaffed | status: proposed | source: fictional fixture.” A second row named promotion uncertainty and V09/V10 capacity shortfall and left the disposition blank. The rule cell mentioned without verifying volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy. No message, transaction, system change, or learner outcome occurred. The audit passed Demand Forecasting task fidelity [WFT-060], Demand Forecasting source traceability [WFT-060], and Demand Forecasting handoff usability [WFT-060]. It found for Demand Forecasting rule accuracy [WFT-060], the draft mentioned but did not verify volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy; for Demand Forecasting exception handling [WFT-060], the draft left promotion uncertainty and V09/V10 capacity shortfall without an explicit disposition. Those evidence defects—and no style preference or new goal—became the complete single-correction prompt.Initial score: 6/10
05 · One pass only
Exact correction prompt
Only this single correction was allowed; there was no second repair pass.
Correct only these detected WFT-060 first-draft failures, using no new input or goal: 1) Demand Forecasting rule accuracy [WFT-060] — the draft mentioned but did not verify volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy; 2) Demand Forecasting exception handling [WFT-060] — the draft left promotion uncertainty and V09/V10 capacity shortfall without an explicit disposition.06 · Corrected output
Corrected final result
Corrected response WFT-060 preserved all supplied identifiers and the central decision: convert volume to workload, cap occupancy at 80%, show both uplift bounds, and flag V09/V10 as understaffed. Its corrected row read “WFT-060-V09 | rule: volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy | decision: convert volume to workload, cap occupancy at 80%, show both uplift bounds, and flag V09/V10 as understaffed | static status: 8/10.” It changed only failed dimensions, adding support for Demand Forecasting rule accuracy [WFT-060]. The final audit passed Demand Forecasting task fidelity [WFT-060], Demand Forecasting rule accuracy [WFT-060], Demand Forecasting source traceability [WFT-060], and Demand Forecasting handoff usability [WFT-060]. It still lacked Demand Forecasting exception handling [WFT-060]; those failures remain visible. The interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band earned 8/10 from 4 checks; no second repair was attempted. This transcript-and-fixture result does not claim any person, workplace, learner, account, device, service, or external system was contacted, changed, tested live, or improved.Final score: 8/10
07 · Five checks, two points each
Five-check record
The first and final statuses are textual as well as color coded. Each final pass is worth two points; the displayed verdict is tied to the final total.
| Check | First | Final | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Demand Forecasting task fidelity [WFT-060] | Pass | Pass | WFT-060 static check 1 inspected “Demand Forecasting task fidelity [WFT-060]” against WFT-060-V09, the rule “volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy,” and the saved interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band. The first transcript passed; the corrected transcript passed. Only fictional text counted, never a live outcome. |
| Demand Forecasting rule accuracy [WFT-060] | Fail | Pass | WFT-060 static check 2 inspected “Demand Forecasting rule accuracy [WFT-060]” against WFT-060-V09, the rule “volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy,” and the saved interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band. The first transcript failed; the corrected transcript passed. Only fictional text counted, never a live outcome. |
| Demand Forecasting exception handling [WFT-060] | Fail | Fail | WFT-060 static check 3 inspected “Demand Forecasting exception handling [WFT-060]” against WFT-060-V09, the rule “volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy,” and the saved interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band. The first transcript failed; the corrected transcript failed. Only fictional text counted, never a live outcome. |
| Demand Forecasting source traceability [WFT-060] | Pass | Pass | WFT-060 static check 4 inspected “Demand Forecasting source traceability [WFT-060]” against WFT-060-V09, the rule “volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy,” and the saved interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band. The first transcript passed; the corrected transcript passed. Only fictional text counted, never a live outcome. |
| Demand Forecasting handoff usability [WFT-060] | Pass | Pass | WFT-060 static check 5 inspected “Demand Forecasting handoff usability [WFT-060]” against WFT-060-V09, the rule “volume times handle time versus interval agent minutes at 80% occupancy,” and the saved interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band. The first transcript passed; the corrected transcript passed. Only fictional text counted, never a live outcome. |
08 · No cleanup by omission
What worked—and what failed
What worked
- WFT-060 bounded “forecast call volume while preserving uncertainty for staffing decisions” to disclosed fictional inputs and froze the first response.
- WFT-060 exposed WFT-060-V09—convert volume to workload, cap occupancy at 80%, show both uplift bounds, and flag V09/V10 as understaffed—inside the saved interval demand forecast, staffing-capacity table, and uncertainty band.
- WFT-060 earned inspectable passes for Demand Forecasting task fidelity [WFT-060] and Demand Forecasting rule accuracy [WFT-060] under the unchanged rubric.
What failed or remained weak
- WFT-060 still lacked saved-text evidence for Demand Forecasting exception handling [WFT-060]; that failure remains published.
09 · Inspectable record
Evidence notes
Holdout error, interval coverage, peak recall, and staffing-impact calculations will compare the forecast with simple baselines.
- WFT-060 preserves the exact synthetic prompt, frozen first-response account, failure-only correction, corrected-response account, and five boolean decisions together.
- WFT-060 scores are arithmetic: 3 first-pass checks × 2 = 6/10; 4 final-pass checks × 2 = 8/10.
- WFT-060 evaluated only the text/static portion of the declared evidence plan—Holdout error, interval coverage, peak recall, and staffing-impact calculations will compare the forecast with simple baselines.—and did not fabricate a live artifact, external validator, or observed outcome.
10 · Boundary of the claim
Limitations
- WFT-060 is a synthetic benchmark, so its worked verdict measures fit to the disclosed fictional Demand Forecasting fixtures rather than effectiveness in a real workplace or learning setting.
- WFT-060 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.