File size: 22,219 Bytes
d09534e
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
23050b1
d09534e
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
23050b1
 
 
d09534e
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
23050b1
d09534e
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
"""
data.py — ExecAssist Environment Data & Scoring

Contains:
- Scenario templates for easy/medium/hard tasks
- Reward functions (email quality, scheduling correctness, conflict resolution)
- Anti-reward hacking penalties
- Helper functions for time/calendar logic
"""

import random
import os
from datetime import datetime, timedelta
from typing import Dict, List, Optional
from openai import OpenAI

# ============================================================
# TASK DEFINITIONS
# ============================================================

TASK_DEFINITIONS = {
    "easy": {
        "description": (
            "Simple meeting request with clear calendar availability. "
            "Draft professional reply and book the meeting."
        ),
        "action_required": "Send email confirmation and book meeting in available slot",
        "reward_weights": {
            "email": 0.5,
            "scheduling": 0.5,
            "conflict": 0.0,
        },
    },
    "medium": {
        "description": (
            "Scheduling conflict — requested time is already booked. "
            "Identify conflict, propose 2-3 alternatives, explain professionally."
        ),
        "action_required": "Send email with alternative times and explain conflict",
        "reward_weights": {
            "email": 0.3,
            "scheduling": 0.3,
            "conflict": 0.4,
        },
    },
    "hard": {
        "description": (
            "Multi-party coordination with priority conflicts. "
            "3 emails requesting meetings, prioritize and reschedule."
        ),
        "action_required": "Coordinate multiple meetings, prioritize, and reschedule",
        "reward_weights": {
            "email": 0.34,
            "scheduling": 0.33,
            "conflict": 0.33,
        },
    },
}


# ============================================================
# SCENARIO DATA POOLS
# ============================================================

MEETING_TOPICS = [
    "Q2 roadmap review",
    "Budget planning session",
    "Project status update",
    "Team sync",
    "1-on-1 check-in",
    "Client presentation prep",
    "Sprint retrospective",
    "Product demo",
    "Strategy discussion",
    "Performance review",
]

SENDER_NAMES = [
    ("John Smith", "john.smith@company.com"),
    ("Sarah Johnson", "sarah.johnson@company.com"),
    ("Michael Chen", "michael.chen@company.com"),
    ("Emily Rodriguez", "emily.rodriguez@company.com"),
    ("David Kim", "david.kim@company.com"),
    ("Lisa Wang", "lisa.wang@company.com"),
    ("James Anderson", "james.anderson@company.com"),
    ("Maria Garcia", "maria.garcia@company.com"),
]


# ============================================================
# SCENARIO GENERATION
# ============================================================

def generate_scenario(task: str, seed: int = None) -> dict:
    """
    Generate a scenario for the given task difficulty.
    
    Returns dict with:
    - id: scenario identifier
    - emails: list of email objects
    - calendar: calendar state with existing meetings
    - contacts: contact information
    - expected_behavior: what agent should do
    - has_conflict: True if scheduling conflict exists
    """
    
    if seed is not None:
        rng = random.Random(seed)
    else:
        rng = random.Random()
    
    if task == "easy":
        return _generate_easy_scenario(rng)
    elif task == "medium":
        return _generate_medium_scenario(rng)
    elif task == "hard":
        return _generate_hard_scenario(rng)
    else:
        raise ValueError(f"Unknown task: {task}")


def _generate_easy_scenario(rng: random.Random) -> dict:
    """Generate simple meeting request with clear availability."""
    
    sender_name, sender_email = rng.choice(SENDER_NAMES)
    topic = rng.choice(MEETING_TOPICS)
    
    base_date = datetime(2026, 4, 28, 9, 0)  # Monday 9 AM
    
    existing_meetings = [
        {
            "id": "mtg_001",
            "participants": ["alex.chen@company.com", "team@company.com"],
            "start_time": (base_date + timedelta(hours=1)).isoformat(),
            "end_time": (base_date + timedelta(hours=2)).isoformat(),
            "subject": "Team standup",
            "priority": "normal",
        },
        {
            "id": "mtg_002",
            "participants": ["alex.chen@company.com", "client@external.com"],
            "start_time": (base_date + timedelta(days=1, hours=5)).isoformat(),
            "end_time": (base_date + timedelta(days=1, hours=6, minutes=30)).isoformat(),
            "subject": "Client call",
            "priority": "high",
        },
    ]
    
    email_body = f"Hi Alex,\n\nCan we meet sometime next week to discuss {topic.lower()}? 30 minutes should be enough. I'm flexible on timing.\n\nBest,\n{sender_name}"
    
    return {
        "id": "easy_001",
        "task": "easy",
        "emails": [
            {
                "sender": sender_email,
                "subject": f"Meeting request: {topic}",
                "body": email_body,
                "timestamp": datetime.now().isoformat(),
                "priority": "normal",
            }
        ],
        "calendar": {
            "existing_meetings": existing_meetings,
            "working_hours": {
                "monday": "9-17",
                "tuesday": "9-17",
                "wednesday": "9-17",
                "thursday": "9-17",
                "friday": "9-16",
            },
            "executive_name": "Alex Chen",
        },
        "contacts": {
            sender_email: {
                "name": sender_name,
                "email": sender_email,
                "timezone": "America/Los_Angeles",
                "title": "Senior Manager",
            }
        },
        "expected_behavior": "Book meeting in open slot",
        "has_conflict": False,
    }


def _generate_medium_scenario(rng: random.Random) -> dict:
    """Generate scenario with scheduling conflict."""
    
    sender_name, sender_email = rng.choice(SENDER_NAMES)
    topic = rng.choice(MEETING_TOPICS)
    
    base_date = datetime(2026, 4, 28, 9, 0)
    
    # Conflict: Monday 2-4 PM is already booked
    conflict_start = base_date + timedelta(hours=5)
    conflict_end = base_date + timedelta(hours=7)
    
    existing_meetings = [
        {
            "id": "mtg_001",
            "participants": ["alex.chen@company.com", "board@company.com"],
            "start_time": conflict_start.isoformat(),
            "end_time": conflict_end.isoformat(),
            "subject": "Board meeting",
            "priority": "high",
        },
        {
            "id": "mtg_002",
            "participants": ["alex.chen@company.com", "manager@company.com"],
            "start_time": (base_date + timedelta(days=1, hours=0)).isoformat(),
            "end_time": (base_date + timedelta(days=1, hours=1)).isoformat(),
            "subject": "1-on-1 with manager",
            "priority": "normal",
        },
    ]
    
    email_body = f"Hi Alex,\n\nWe need to discuss {topic.lower()}. I'm available Monday 2-4pm or Tuesday morning. Can we make this work? It's fairly urgent.\n\nThanks,\n{sender_name}"
    
    return {
        "id": "medium_001",
        "task": "medium",
        "emails": [
            {
                "sender": sender_email,
                "subject": f"Urgent: {topic}",
                "body": email_body,
                "timestamp": datetime.now().isoformat(),
                "priority": "high",
            }
        ],
        "calendar": {
            "existing_meetings": existing_meetings,
            "working_hours": {
                "monday": "9-17",
                "tuesday": "9-17",
                "wednesday": "9-17",
                "thursday": "9-17",
                "friday": "9-16",
            },
            "executive_name": "Alex Chen",
        },
        "contacts": {
            sender_email: {
                "name": sender_name,
                "email": sender_email,
                "timezone": "America/Los_Angeles",
                "title": "Director",
            }
        },
        "expected_behavior": "Identify conflict, propose Tuesday 10-11 AM as alternative",
        "has_conflict": True,
    }


def _generate_hard_scenario(rng: random.Random) -> dict:
    """Generate multi-party coordination scenario with 3 emails and priority conflicts."""
    
    senders = rng.sample(SENDER_NAMES, 3)
    topics = rng.sample(MEETING_TOPICS, 3)
    
    base_date = datetime(2026, 4, 28, 9, 0)  # Monday 9 AM
    
    # Existing calendar — Monday 2-3 PM blocked with team sync
    existing_meetings = [
        {
            "id": "mtg_001",
            "participants": ["alex.chen@company.com", "team@company.com"],
            "start_time": (base_date + timedelta(hours=5)).isoformat(),  # Monday 2 PM
            "end_time": (base_date + timedelta(hours=6)).isoformat(),  # Monday 3 PM
            "subject": "Team sync",
            "priority": "normal",
        },
        {
            "id": "mtg_002",
            "participants": ["alex.chen@company.com", "exec@company.com"],
            "start_time": (base_date + timedelta(days=2, hours=2)).isoformat(),  # Wed 11 AM
            "end_time": (base_date + timedelta(days=2, hours=3)).isoformat(),  # Wed 12 PM
            "subject": "Executive review",
            "priority": "high",
        },
    ]
    
    # Three competing email requests
    emails = [
        {
            "sender": senders[0][1],
            "subject": f"Meeting: {topics[0]}",
            "body": (
                f"Hi Alex,\n\nCan we meet Monday 2:30-3:30 PM to discuss {topics[0].lower()}? "
                f"I'd really appreciate your input.\n\nThanks,\n{senders[0][0]}"
            ),
            "timestamp": datetime.now().isoformat(),
            "priority": "normal",
        },
        {
            "sender": senders[1][1],
            "subject": f"URGENT: {topics[1]}",
            "body": (
                f"Alex,\n\nWe need to discuss {topics[1].lower()} ASAP. "
                f"Monday afternoon works for me — ideally 2-3 PM. "
                f"This is time-sensitive and high priority.\n\nBest,\n{senders[1][0]}"
            ),
            "timestamp": datetime.now().isoformat(),
            "priority": "high",
        },
        {
            "sender": senders[2][1],
            "subject": f"{topics[2]} discussion",
            "body": (
                f"Hi Alex,\n\nCan we sync on {topics[2].lower()} sometime this week? "
                f"I'm flexible — any 30-minute slot works for me.\n\nThanks,\n{senders[2][0]}"
            ),
            "timestamp": datetime.now().isoformat(),
            "priority": "normal",
        },
    ]
    
    contacts = {
        sender[1]: {
            "name": sender[0],
            "email": sender[1],
            "timezone": "America/Los_Angeles",
            "title": "Manager",
        }
        for sender in senders
    }
    
    return {
        "id": "hard_001",
        "task": "hard",
        "emails": emails,
        "calendar": {
            "existing_meetings": existing_meetings,
            "working_hours": {
                "monday": "9-17",
                "tuesday": "9-17",
                "wednesday": "9-17",
                "thursday": "9-17",
                "friday": "9-16",
            },
            "executive_name": "Alex Chen",
        },
        "contacts": contacts,
        "expected_behavior": (
            "Prioritize URGENT email (sender 2). Book that meeting. "
            "Propose alternatives to sender 1 (conflicts with urgent). "
            "Offer flexible times to sender 3."
        ),
        "has_conflict": True,
    }


# ============================================================
# REWARD FUNCTION 1: EMAIL QUALITY
# ============================================================

def compute_email_quality(reply: str, scenario: dict) -> float:
    """
    Score email quality using rule-based checks + LLM judge.
    
    Returns score 0.0 to 1.0.
    
    Components:
    - Politeness (15%)
    - Greeting/closing (10%)
    - Sufficient detail (15%)
    - Not overly uncertain (10%)
    - Professional tone (10%)
    - LLM judge for nuance (40%)
    """
    
    score = 0.0
    reply_lower = reply.lower()
    
    # Rule 1: Politeness markers (15%)
    if any(phrase in reply_lower for phrase in ["thank you", "thanks", "appreciate"]):
        score += 0.15
    
    # Rule 2: Proper greeting (5%) and closing (5%)
    if any(greeting in reply_lower for greeting in ["hi ", "hello", "dear"]):
        score += 0.05
    if any(closing in reply_lower for closing in ["best", "regards", "sincerely", "thanks,"]):
        score += 0.05
    
    # Rule 3: Sufficient detail (15%)
    word_count = len(reply.split())
    if word_count >= 20:
        score += 0.15
    elif word_count >= 10:
        score += 0.08
    
    # Rule 4: Not overly uncertain (10%)
    question_marks = reply.count("?")
    if question_marks <= 2:
        score += 0.10
    
    # Rule 5: Professional tone — no negative phrases (10%)
    negative_phrases = ["can't", "won't", "impossible", "sorry but no", "unfortunately not", "no way"]
    if not any(neg in reply_lower for neg in negative_phrases):
        score += 0.10
    
    # Rule 6: LLM-as-judge for nuance (40%)
    llm_score = _llm_judge_professionalism(reply)
    score += llm_score * 0.40
    
    return min(1.0, score)


def _llm_judge_professionalism(reply: str) -> float:
    """
    LLM-as-judge for email professionalism using OpenRouter API.
    Falls back to heuristic if API unavailable.
    """
    
    api_key = os.getenv("HFTOKEN") or os.getenv("HF_TOKEN") or os.getenv("API_KEY")
    
    # Fallback if no API key
    if not api_key:
        # Simple heuristic fallback
        sentences = [s.strip() for s in reply.split('.') if s.strip()]
        if len(sentences) >= 2 and len(reply) >= 50:
            return 0.7
        return 0.4
    
    try:
        client = OpenAI(
        base_url=os.getenv("APIBASEURL") or os.getenv("API_BASE_URL", "https://openrouter.ai/api/v1"),
        api_key=api_key,
    )
        
        prompt = f"""Rate the professionalism of this email reply on a scale of 0.0 to 1.0.

Email reply:
\"\"\"{reply}\"\"\"

Criteria:
- Clear and concise
- Professional tone
- No typos or grammar errors
- Appropriate level of formality
- Addresses the request directly

Respond with ONLY a single decimal number between 0.0 and 1.0. No explanation, just the number."""

        response = client.chat.completions.create(
            model=os.getenv("MODELNAME") or os.getenv("MODEL_NAME", "nvidia/nemotron-3-super-120b-a12b:free"),
            messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}],
            temperature=0.1,
            max_tokens=10,
        )
        
        score_text = response.choices[0].message.content.strip()
        # Extract just the number
        for token in score_text.split():
            try:
                score = float(token)
                return max(0.0, min(1.0, score))
            except ValueError:
                continue
        
        return 0.5
        
    except Exception as e:
        print(f"LLM judge error: {e}")
        # Fallback heuristic
        sentences = [s.strip() for s in reply.split('.') if s.strip()]
        if len(sentences) >= 2 and len(reply) >= 50:
            return 0.7
        return 0.4


# ============================================================
# REWARD FUNCTION 2: SCHEDULING CORRECTNESS
# ============================================================

def check_scheduling_correctness(meeting_details: Optional[dict], scenario: dict) -> dict:
    """
    Verify scheduling correctness with hard checks.
    
    """

    # DEBUG: Print what we received
    print("=== DEBUG check_scheduling_correctness ===")
    print(f"meeting_details: {meeting_details}")
    print(f"scenario keys: {scenario.keys() if scenario else 'None'}")
    print(f"calendar: {scenario.get('calendar') if scenario else 'None'}")
    print("==========================================")
    
    if not meeting_details:
        return {
            "checks": {
                "meeting_provided": False,
                "no_double_booking": False,
                "within_working_hours": False,
                "appropriate_duration": False,
            },
            "score": 0.0,
        }
    
    calendar = scenario["calendar"]
    existing_meetings = calendar["existing_meetings"]
    
    results = {
        "meeting_provided": True,
        "no_double_booking": True,
        "within_working_hours": True,
        "appropriate_duration": True,
    }
    
    # Parse meeting times
    try:
        meeting_start = datetime.fromisoformat(meeting_details["start_time"])
        meeting_end = datetime.fromisoformat(meeting_details["end_time"])
    except (KeyError, ValueError, TypeError):
        return {
            "checks": {
                "meeting_provided": True,
                "no_double_booking": False,
                "within_working_hours": False,
                "appropriate_duration": False,
            },
            "score": 0.25,  # Some credit for trying
        }
    
    # Check 1: No double booking
    for existing in existing_meetings:
        try:
            existing_start = datetime.fromisoformat(existing["start_time"])
            existing_end = datetime.fromisoformat(existing["end_time"])
            
            # Check for overlap
            if not (meeting_end <= existing_start or meeting_start >= existing_end):
                results["no_double_booking"] = False
                break
        except (KeyError, ValueError):
            continue
    
    # Check 2: Within working hours (9 AM - 5 PM)
    if meeting_start.hour < 9 or meeting_end.hour > 17:
        results["within_working_hours"] = False
    if meeting_end.hour == 17 and meeting_end.minute > 0:
        results["within_working_hours"] = False
    
    # Check 3: Appropriate duration (15 min to 2 hours)
    duration_minutes = (meeting_end - meeting_start).total_seconds() / 60
    if not (15 <= duration_minutes <= 120):
        results["appropriate_duration"] = False
    
    # Compute overall score
    score = sum(results.values()) / len(results)
    
    return {
        "checks": results,
        "score": score,
    }


# ============================================================
# REWARD FUNCTION 3: CONFLICT RESOLUTION
# ============================================================

def compute_conflict_resolution(action: dict, scenario: dict) -> float:
    """
    Score how well the agent handled scheduling conflicts.
    
    Returns score 0.0 to 1.0.
    """
    
    has_conflict = scenario.get("has_conflict", False)
    calendar_action = action.get("calendar_action", "")
    email_reply = action.get("email_reply", "")
    meeting_details = action.get("meeting_details") or {}
    
    score = 0.0
    
    if has_conflict:
        # Agent should recognize the conflict
        if calendar_action in ["propose_alternatives", "reschedule"]:
            score += 0.4
        elif calendar_action == "book":
            # Check if they at least booked at a non-conflicting time
            score += 0.1
        
        # Check if alternatives were provided
        alternatives = meeting_details.get("proposed_alternatives", []) or []
        if alternatives:
            num_alternatives = len(alternatives)
            score += min(0.4, num_alternatives * 0.2)  # 2 alts = 0.4, 3+ = capped at 0.4
        
        # Check if email mentions the conflict
        conflict_keywords = ["conflict", "already booked", "unavailable", "scheduled", "occupied", "another meeting"]
        if any(word in email_reply.lower() for word in conflict_keywords):
            score += 0.2
    else:
        # No conflict — agent should just book
        if calendar_action == "book":
            score = 1.0
        elif calendar_action == "propose_alternatives":
            score = 0.5  # Partial credit
        else:
            score = 0.3
    
    return min(1.0, score)


# ============================================================
# ANTI-REWARD HACKING: PENALTIES
# ============================================================

def apply_penalties(action: dict, scenario: dict) -> float:
    """
    Detect and penalize reward hacking behaviors.
    
    Returns penalty amount (0.0 = no penalty, higher = worse).
    """
    
    penalty = 0.0
    email_reply = action.get("email_reply", "")
    calendar_action = action.get("calendar_action", "")
    meeting_details = action.get("meeting_details")
    
    # Penalty 1: Email too short (lazy response)
    if len(email_reply.strip()) < 30:
        penalty += 0.3
    
    # Penalty 2: Claimed to book but no details provided
    if calendar_action == "book" and not meeting_details:
        penalty += 0.4
    
    # Penalty 3: Generic templated phrases
    generic_phrases = [
        "as per your request",
        "please find attached",
        "hope this helps",
        "let me know if you have any questions",
        "do not hesitate to contact",
    ]
    if any(phrase in email_reply.lower() for phrase in generic_phrases):
        penalty += 0.10
    
    # Penalty 4: Overly long email (rambling)
    if len(email_reply.split()) > 200:
        penalty += 0.15
    
    # Penalty 5: Repeating the same content multiple times
    words = email_reply.lower().split()
    if len(words) > 20:
        word_diversity = len(set(words)) / len(words)
        if word_diversity < 0.4:  # Less than 40% unique words = repetitive
            penalty += 0.20
    
    return min(1.0, penalty)


# ============================================================
# HELPER FUNCTIONS
# ============================================================

def parse_time_slot(time_str: str) -> Optional[datetime]:
    """Parse ISO time string to datetime object."""
    try:
        return datetime.fromisoformat(time_str)
    except (ValueError, TypeError):
        return None


def format_time_slot(dt: datetime) -> str:
    """Format datetime to readable string."""
    return dt.strftime("%A, %B %d at %I:%M %p")