Business judgment
spread 50 spread 48 · 6 criteria · 21 pts · #004
Turn an analysis into a decision a leadership team can act on, choosing the metric the decision actually depends on, and stating the conclusion explicitly, outside the workings.
// capabilities · taxonomy v0.2
Model by model
What each one is good at
A Monday Score says how far a model got. This says where it lost the points: the same atomic criteria as the scenario leaderboards, regrouped by the capability they measure, whichever Monday they come from.
Every criterion in the benchmark maps to exactly one capability, so every criterion counts exactly once. #001’s noise-resistance dimension is scored as a whole, so it maps as one more entry.
- 22 capabilities
- 118 criteria
- 500 rubric points
- 15 11 models
How to read it
- Nothing here changes a scenario result: these percentages are a decomposition of results that already exist.
- There is no capability total and no capability winner, because summing capabilities would weight them by whatever point mass the rubrics gave them.
- Penalties are excluded. A scenario penalty is a global deduction, and attributing one to a capability would mean inventing the attribution.
Read it across rows. Two models are comparable on one capability; two capabilities on the same model are not, because the weighting is whatever point mass the rubrics happened to give them and says nothing about importance.
All models Open-weight models only
Scenarios included #001 · #002 · #003 · #004 · #005
Execution and judgment 6 capabilities · 32 criteria · 169 pts
Planning
spread 35 spread 26 · 5 criteria · 30 pts · #002 #003
Produce a sequence that actually runs: the right option chosen, work parallelised where it can be, and the schedule coherent with its own dependencies.
Resource allocation
spread 30 spread 25 · 3 criteria · 21 pts · #003
Resolve contention for a scarce person or window, including choosing what that person should not do.
Prioritization
spread 28 spread 27 · 11 criteria · 60 pts · #001 #002 #003
Identify which items require action now, order them against each other, and keep resolved, delegated or cosmetic items from displacing real work.
Action safety
spread 7 · 4 criteria · 23 pts · #001 #002 #004
Decline actions the evidence rules out — sending confidential material externally, acting on a superseded instruction, scaling spend on a misleading figure, chasing an item that is already closed.
Ownership and delegation
separates nobody · 3 criteria · 14 pts · #001 #002 #003
Establish who currently owns a piece of work, and route work to the person who should hold it.
Reasoning 5 capabilities · 39 criteria · 151 pts
Temporal reasoning
spread 76 · 3 criteria · 14 pts · #002 #003
Reason about dates, durations, deadlines and availability windows, and decide what is reachable within them.
Quantitative reasoning
spread 70 · 16 criteria · 66 pts · #001 #002 #004 #005
Compute a business figure correctly and choose the right basis for it: rates against the right denominator, the full distribution where an average would mislead, like-for-like comparisons, and normalisation before comparison.
Dependency reasoning
spread 39 spread 27 · 5 criteria · 25 pts · #002 #003
Reconstruct what must happen before what, identify the chain that sets a delivery date, and keep work that is not on that chain off it.
Uncertainty calibration
spread 39 spread 36 · 7 criteria · 23 pts · #001 #002 #003 #004 #005
Identify what cannot be determined from the sources, say so, hold back any number or verdict on it, and name the evidence that would settle it.
Causal discipline
spread 42 · 8 criteria · 23 pts · #001 #002 #004 #005
Refuse a causal claim the evidence does not support, while still reporting the pattern. The failure mode is a plausible mechanism stated as a finding.
Information handling 6 capabilities · 28 criteria · 117 pts
Factual accuracy
spread 67 · 2 criteria · 8 pts · #003 #004
Carry supplied values — deadlines, durations, owners, counts, totals — through the whole answer without substituting different ones. It measures whether a figure already given stays intact; deriving the right figure belongs to Quantitative reasoning.
Entity resolution
spread 100 · 1 criterion · 4 pts · #004
Join records about the same entity whose identifiers differ between files, and notice when a naive join has silently dropped one.
Supersession
spread 40 · 6 criteria · 27 pts · #002 #003 #005
Recognise that a later source overrides an earlier one, and act on the later one. Distinct from state reconstruction: here both facts are present and explicit, and the question is which of them still holds.
Data cleaning
spread 70 · 2 criteria · 10 pts · #004
Detect and correct artifacts in the data itself — duplicated records, values recorded on a basis that is not comparable — before computing anything from them.
Cross-source reconciliation
spread 39 · 4 criteria · 18 pts · #002 #004
Build one finding from several sources that no single source supports, and refuse a finding that one source appears to support but another explains away.
State reconstruction
spread 17 · 13 criteria · 50 pts · #001 #002 #003 #005
Determine the current state of a thing — an incident, a release, a contract, a piece of work — from evidence that is scattered across sources and partly out of date. The failure mode is reporting a state that was true earlier.
Communication 5 capabilities · 20 criteria · 63 pts
Information routing
spread 43 · 2 criteria · 7 pts · #005
Deliver a fact to the internal audience that needs it in order to act. The mirror image of information boundaries: that capability is about what must not leave, this one about what must arrive. They are separated because monday-005 measured them separately and they came apart — across every official run no model disclosed any of the four explicit confidential classes externally, while the criterion asking whether the same security item reached the engineering handoff was tied for the most-failed in the scenario, which shows suppression and delivery to be separate skills.
Audience adaptation
spread 22 · 5 criteria · 17 pts · #005
Decide what a particular reader needs from a body of facts, and give them only that, without falling back on everything or on a summary of everything. The failure mode is one document written four times: correct in substance, wrong for three of its readers. It is separate from writing quality, which MondayBench does not measure: the judgment covers what is selected and at what level, and leaves expression aside.
Commitment discipline
spread 30 · 3 criteria · 10 pts · #005
Distinguish an internal estimate from an authorised external promise, and commit the organisation only to what someone has actually approved. Adjacent to uncertainty calibration, which asks whether the model knows what it does not know; this asks whether it knows what it is allowed to say.
Cross-output consistency
spread 17 · 4 criteria · 16 pts · #005
Represent one underlying reality across several separately targeted artifacts so that no two of them assert incompatible states. Uniformity is explicitly not required: differing levels of detail, differing framing, and a fact present in one artifact and absent from another are all consistent. Only a contradiction of factual or commitment state counts. Cannot be measured by a scenario that produces one output, which is why nothing before monday-005 covers it.
Information boundaries
spread 8 · 6 criteria · 13 pts · #005
Keep information that must not cross a confidentiality line on the correct side of it. suppression only: internal technical and security detail, one customer’s identity in front of another, personal data in a public artifact, and internal architecture. Distinct from action safety, which is declining an action the evidence rules out; here nothing is recommended and the disclosure is itself the harm. Deliberately does not cover making sure a fact arrives — see information routing.
// why we built this
Benchmarks are useful,
but what matters is your workload
We compare open models in production so you can tell how close they are to closed models. MondayBench is how we check whether they are really useful before they get there.