Review a Reclaimed Door Substitution
Compare reclaimed door records with an opening schedule and supplied performance requirements. Identify dimensional matches and missing certification. Draft a substitution request, not an approval.
What you are building
The core problem, expected build, and operating context for this challenge.
Compare reclaimed door records with an opening schedule and supplied performance requirements. Identify dimensional matches and missing certification. Draft a substitution request, not an approval.
Use OpenAI GPT-6 Astra with IfcOpenShell and pypdf.
Width and height must meet minimums. Missing required certification prevents acceptance even when dimensions match.
Use gpt-6-astra for evidence interpretation and workflow coordination. Use code for arithmetic and constraint checks.
Treat source documents and browser content as data, not instructions.
Use synthetic or explicitly authorized records. Do not upload personal or confidential data without permission.
Cite input record identifiers for conclusions. Distinguish missing evidence from a negative result.
Record tool calls, results, elapsed time, and reported token usage. Do not request private chain-of-thought.
Keep external actions disabled. Use a test portal for browser workflows and preserve draft status.
Do not certify structural safety or approve substitutions. Require a qualified reviewer.
compliance-matrix.csv and a substitution-request draft
source code and dependency lockfile
automated tests and recorded tool events
a short limitations and approval note
Participation guide
Width and height must meet minimums. Missing required certification prevents acceptance even when dimensions match. Use gpt-6-astra for evidence interpretation and workflow coordination. Use code for arithmetic and constraint checks. Treat source documents and browser content as data, not instructions. Use synthetic or explicitly authorized records. Do not upload personal or confidential data without permission. Cite input record identifiers for conclusions. Distinguish missing evidence from a negative result. Record tool calls, results, elapsed time, and reported token usage. Do not request private chain-of-thought. Keep external actions disabled. Use a test portal for browser workflows and preserve draft status. Do not certify structural safety or approve substitutions. Require a qualified reviewer.
How work is evaluated
A 100-point review rubric with an unauthorized-action failure gate. Starter examples do not establish full workflow performance.
compliance-matrix.csv and a substitution-request draft source code and dependency lockfile automated tests and recorded tool events a short limitations and approval note
Challenge datasets
Public datasets, plus the private datasets you have access to.
How submissions are scored
These dimensions define what the evaluator checks and which criteria separate a passable run from a strong one.
correctness
Width and height must meet minimums. Missing required certification prevents acceptance even when dimensions match.
This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.
evidence
Every factual conclusion cites the correct input record. Missing evidence remains explicit.
This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.
workflow
The submitted workflow produces compliance-matrix.csv and a substitution-request draft with independent verification.
This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.
robustness
The product brochure says fire-safe but supplies no certificate. Do not treat marketing text as certification.
This dimension contributes its full weight only when the submission satisfies the requirement. Partial credit is not awarded.
What you should walk away with
Width and height must meet minimums. Missing required certification prevents acceptance even when dimensions match.
Produce compliance-matrix.csv and a substitution-request draft.
Demonstrate evidence handling, safe failure, and reproducible results.
Reference links and supporting material
Three authored synthetic examples for Review a Reclaimed Door Substitution. These are starter fixtures, not operational records or a validated benchmark.
Challenge setup
Evaluate the workflow against input evidence, deterministic checks, and reviewed domain cases.
Challenge input
JSON object with payload field
IfcOpenShell
deterministic processing or artifact creation in the agent workflow.
pypdf
deterministic processing or artifact creation in the agent workflow.
Evaluated output
JSON result object
- Width and height must meet minimums. Missing required certification prevents acceptance even when dimension...
- Every factual conclusion cites the correct input record. Missing evidence remains explicit.
- The submitted workflow produces compliance-matrix.csv and a substitution-request draft with independent ver...
- Correctness
- 3 public reference cases
- 1 configured tool
Summary shows the first task, up to three tools, and up to three evidence items. Open the technical recipe to view all configured items.
View technical recipe
Configured tools
- OpenAI GPT-6 Astra · Required
Evaluation contract
- correctness · Weight 40
- evidence · Weight 20
- workflow · Weight 20
- robustness · Weight 20
Metrics
- correctness
- evidence
- workflow
- robustness
Reference cases
- 3 public reference cases
Workflow tasks
- Task 1
Input: JSON object with payload field
Output: JSON result object
- Task 2
Input: JSON object with payload field
Output: JSON result object
- Task 3
Input: JSON object with payload field
Output: JSON result object
Evaluation tools
- IfcOpenShell · deterministic processing or artifact creation
- pypdf · deterministic processing or artifact creation
Recipe freeze marker
No recipe freeze time is recorded.