gpt-oss-120b on “A pyramid of an existing memo”: with Minto, worse on structure, quality unchanged

Structure 8 → 7 of 8 −1 Quality 9 → 9 of 10 0

The judge on the output with Minto

The main hierarchy is correct, but identical checks, test safeguards, recruitment difficulty, and lateness are omitted.

Mode viz · case 06-ttw-viz · run v1.7.0-final

Structure of 8, 2 points per axis
StructureWithout Minto 8With Minto 7Change
Top22
Key-line composition22
Levels21−1
Order and kind22
Quality of 10, 2 points per axis
QualityWithout Minto 9With Minto 9Change
Top22
Same-kind grouping22
Explainable order22
MECE21−1
Visible, proportionate structure12+1

Outputs and the judge’s words are quoted as written, in English.

Without Minto

control prompt · blind label out-05

No hard failures

Content is complete, though the flush-left support lists make their connection to the side-by-side parent headings less immediately visible.

                               Cut composing cost substantially
                                     (by removing unnecessary stages and raising wages
                                                   to the local‑market level)
                
                        ┌───────────────────────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────────────┐
                        │          Remove unnecessary stages    │               Raise wages            │
                        └───────────────────────────────────────┴───────────────────────────────────────┘
                        • TTW trails productivity benchmark by 20‑50 %
                        • All titles undergo the same checks regardless of complexity
                        • Test simple jobs with fewer or differently timed checks; monitor quality
                          and customer reaction
                        • Potential saving: up to 10 % of composing cost
                        • Methods study to examine the remaining benchmark gap
                
                        • TTW pays less than nearby printers → cannot hire/retain enough compositors
                        • Two compositors have left; department understaffed; most work is late
                        • Overtime exceeds budget by >50 %
                        • A new union claim may force higher pay
                        • Competitive pay should enable recruitment and eliminate the overtime premium

With Minto

prompt with the skill · blind label out-09
  • unacknowledged_source_loss
  • quality after the rubric’s penalty 8/10

The main hierarchy is correct, but identical checks, test safeguards, recruitment difficulty, and lateness are omitted.

flowchart TD
                    A["TTW can cut composing cost substantially by removing unnecessary process stages and raising wages to market level"] --> B["Remove unnecessary process stages"]
                    A --> C["Raise wages to market level"]
                    B --> B1["Productivity benchmark lag 20‑50%"]
                    B --> B2["Test simple jobs with fewer/differently timed checks"]
                    B --> B3["Potential saving up to 10% of composing cost"]
                    B --> B4["Methods study to examine remaining benchmark gap"]
                    C --> C1["Current pay below nearby printers"]
                    C --> C2["Understaffed; two compositors left; overtime >50% of budget"]
                    C --> C3["Union claim may force higher pay"]
                    C --> C4["Competitive pay would enable recruitment and eliminate overtime premium"]

How the test was built

gpt-oss-120b received the same task twice. The control prompt is one framing line and the task. The prompt with Minto is the same task preceded by the full text of the skill. The judge read both outputs among 16 under blind labels and did not know which one had the skill.

Prompt without Minto 1 688 B
You are working on a business document using the Minto Pyramid Principle.

<!-- Faithful paraphrase of Minto (2010), Chapter 3, the rewritten TTW memo.
     Original wording for this fixture. -->

# Fixture 06: TTW pyramid

**Mode:** `viz`
**Language:** `en`

## Context

The TTW memo has already been rewritten. Show its existing structure; do not
rewrite it.

## Before

```text
Subject: TTW composing cost

During the past two weeks I reviewed the Aylesbury composing room. Composition
represents about 40% of hardback cost and 50-55% of paperback cost. TTW does not
know whether the cost is excessive, but customers regard it as uncompetitive on
simple jobs.

Our preliminary work indicates that TTW can cut composing cost substantially
by:

- removing unnecessary process stages;
- raising wages to the local market level.

REMOVE UNNECESSARY STAGES

TTW trails the productivity benchmark by 20-50%. Every title passes through
essentially the same checks regardless of complexity. Next week, selected
simple jobs will be tested with fewer or differently timed checks, while
quality and customer reaction are monitored. The possible saving is up to 10%
of composing cost. A methods study will examine the remaining benchmark gap.

RAISE WAGES

TTW pays less than nearby printers and cannot hire or retain enough
compositors. Two have just left. The department is understaffed, most work is
late, and overtime exceeds budget by more than 50%. A new union claim may force
higher pay; competitive pay should make recruitment possible and remove the
overtime premium.
```

## Task

Draw the pyramid of this memorandum.

Return only the result, with no explanation of how you produced it.
Prompt with Minto five parts, in order · 29 261 B
  1. Below is a skill written as an instruction. Read it in full and apply it to the task at the end.
  2. ===== SKILL.md ===== SKILL.md at f4813ce 17 235 B
  3. ===== references/rules.md ===== references/rules.md at f4813ce 6 464 B
  4. ===== references/templates.md ===== references/templates.md at f4813ce 3 742 B
  5. ===== TASK ===== the whole case input
  6. Return only the result, with no explanation of how you produced it.
Case input before.md

<!-- Faithful paraphrase of Minto (2010), Chapter 3, the rewritten TTW memo.
Original wording for this fixture. -->

Fixture 06: TTW pyramid

Mode: viz
Language: en

Context

The TTW memo has already been rewritten. Show its existing structure; do not
rewrite it.

Before
Subject: TTW composing cost
                
                During the past two weeks I reviewed the Aylesbury composing room. Composition
                represents about 40% of hardback cost and 50-55% of paperback cost. TTW does not
                know whether the cost is excessive, but customers regard it as uncompetitive on
                simple jobs.
                
                Our preliminary work indicates that TTW can cut composing cost substantially
                by:
                
                - removing unnecessary process stages;
                - raising wages to the local market level.
                
                REMOVE UNNECESSARY STAGES
                
                TTW trails the productivity benchmark by 20-50%. Every title passes through
                essentially the same checks regardless of complexity. Next week, selected
                simple jobs will be tested with fewer or differently timed checks, while
                quality and customer reaction are monitored. The possible saving is up to 10%
                of composing cost. A methods study will examine the remaining benchmark gap.
                
                RAISE WAGES
                
                TTW pays less than nearby printers and cannot hire or retain enough
                compositors. Two have just left. The department is understaffed, most work is
                late, and overtime exceeds budget by more than 50%. A new union claim may force
                higher pay; competitive pay should make recruitment possible and remove the
                overtime premium.
Task

Draw the pyramid of this memorandum.

The judge’s gold gold.md

Gold 06: TTW pyramid

Source structure: Minto (2010), Chapter 3, TTW analysis and rewritten memo.

Expected diagram

Top: TTW can cut composing cost substantially.

Exactly two first-level actions:

  1. Remove unnecessary composing stages.
  2. Raise wages to competitive levels.

Under the first: benchmark gap, identical stages for different work, controlled
test, potential 10% saving, methods study.

Under the second: below-market pay, recruitment and retention failure, two
departures, understaffing, delays, overtime more than 50% over budget, union
pressure.

A valid output contains a Mermaid flowchart TD or an equivalent visible text
diagram. It does not create an HTML page or local file because none was
requested. Repeating section labels without turning them into claims, adding a
third first-level branch, or promoting observations to the first level reduces
the structural score. No prose rewrite is required.

Judge gpt-5.6-sol, effort high · skill from commit f4813ce · run v1.7.0-final