\paragraph{Without failure logs.}\label{sec:redesign-logfree} In the third round, five further samples from Claude Opus~5.5 received the redesign
prompt without the five failure logs: the agent summary, the seed's code and the same task paragraph. Four of the five
raise the output cap to 8{,}192 tokens, as four of five did with the logs; the fifth keeps 4{,}096 but continues after a
truncated response and reruns the agent when no solution was written. In one batch with the seed, which scores $\lfSeedF\%$, the
log-free redesigns gain $\lfGainMin$ to $\lfGainMax$ points, on average $\lfMeanFree$ [$\lfMeanFreelo$, $\lfMeanFreehi$],
compared with $\lfMeanBased$ [$\lfMeanBasedlo$, $\lfMeanBasedhi$] for the redesigns made from failure logs; the difference is
$\lfDiff$ points [$\lfDifflo$, $\lfDiffhi$], so the registered non-inferiority test passes. An exploratory comparison shows that the
averages agree for different reasons. Among the redesigns that raise the cap, those made without logs gain $\lfRaiseDiffAbs$
points [$\lfRaiseDiffAbslo$, $\lfRaiseDiffAbshi$] less than those made from logs. Of the two that keep 4{,}096, the
log-free one gains $\lfKeepFree$ points and the log-based one gains $\lfKeepBased$. Claude Opus~5.5 thus finds the fix from the code
alone when asked for a one-shot redesign, so the failure logs are not needed to find it. In the first round, none of the
\nladConeatt{} diagnoses that Claude Sonnet~5.5 made from the agent's code alone mentions the output cap, stop reasons or
empty responses (Appendix~\ref{app:round1}).