Raycaster/ Eval

APEX-Agents · Law

Law_World_423_DM_05

Best published3/9Fail

APEX-Agents task Law_World_423_DM_05 in AI Agents for Privacy and GDPR Compliance. Compare dual-harness agent runs across models, scores, and public traces.

AI Agents for Privacy and GDPR ComplianceLaw World 423Dual harnessGrader: rubric
task_58e8668c0a7c47808ff26e7b1e5105ae
Law World 423
make_new_doc
7 models · dual config

Task prompt

What the agent was asked to do

Northstar's US customer, Zellwerk, reported a system-wide outage that delayed access to shipment-tracking data containing health-related product identifiers and customer account IDs. During the outage investigation, Northstar's internal team discovered an unapproved third-party analytics module embedded in the US and European instances of the platform for "temporary performance monitoring." The General Counsel has reached out asking if Northstar's data practices would be considered unfair under the Federal Trade Commission Act. Make a NEW document, and prepare a short memorandum with a summary of the relevant legal authority, analysis, and a conclusion.

Published trajectories

Agent runs on this task

Curated dual-harness runs (parsed + original sandbox). Best scored run per model.

ModelHarnessScoreResultLinks
Gemini 3 Flashdual3/9Fail
GPT-5.4 minidual3/9Fail
fireworks models Kimi K2dual2/9Fail
GPT-5.4dual2/9Fail
GPT-5.4 nanodual2/9Fail
GPT-5.5dual2/9Fail
Gemini 3.1 Produal1/9Fail

Grading rubric

Rubric criteria

Runs are graded against these criteria. Open a run for model-specific verdicts.

  1. States that consumer injury could not reasonably have avoided is a required element for a finding of unfairness under the FTC Act

  2. States that a violation of public policy is a required element for a finding of unfairness under the FTC Act

  3. States that unethical or unscrupulous activity is a required element for a finding of unfairness under the FTC Act

  4. States that substantial consumer injury must have occurred in its net effects in order for a practice to be deemed unfair under the FTC Act

  5. States that an exemption to "substantial injury" involves analyzing whether the injury is offset by consumer or competitive benefits of the activity

  6. States that Northstar did not cause a substantial injury

  7. States that Northstar did not violate public policy

  8. States that Northstar's actions do not constitute unethical or unscrupulous practices

  9. States that Northstar did not engage in unfair practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act