Criterion Granularity Mismatch in Rubric (Example: Task 6905333b74f22949d97ba9f1, Criterion 1.11)
We noticed a potential issue with how certain rubric criteria are specified relative to the original user query.
The original query asks for "concrete runtime evidence in the form of request and response traces and observed storage side effects" — a reasonable ask for observable runtime behavior.
Criterion 1.11, however, grades on a much more specific requirement: the presence of raw HTTP-level trace logs in a particular format (TRACE_REQ with method/path, TRACE_RESP with numeric status codes like 200/403/404).
The model answer we examined is actually quite strong — it provides a detailed table of 29 tested operations with outcomes and verified storage side effects, raw HTTP response headers, code-level root cause analysis, and even discovers a genuine security finding (bucket name disclosure via GetBucketLocationAction fallback). It clearly satisfies the spirit of the original query.
However, it fails criterion 1.11 solely because it does not emit low-level HTTP trace logs in the specific TRACE_REQ/TRACE_RESP format — a format requirement that does not appear in the original query and requires explicit client-side trace configuration that the query never asks for.
This seems like a case where the rubric introduces a format constraint that is not grounded in the user's actual intent, potentially penalizing high-quality answers that present the same information in a cleaner, more readable form.
It would be worth reviewing whether criteria like 1.11 are derived from the query itself or from implementation assumptions in the reference answer.
Happy to discuss further — we think the dataset is a great benchmark and are flagging this in the spirit of improving rubric quality.