An operations assistant is redesigning a recurring data-processing workflow step to use Code Execution.
Which two design choices best support reliable integration? (Select two.)
A.
Standardize the input file format the step expects, so each Code Execution run receives consistent input and produces comparable, verifiable output across recurring weekly cycles.
B.
Vary the input file format from run to run to accommodate the different source systems that supply the data each week.
C.
Embed the Code Execution step inside the workflow without documenting the expected output format or the fields it produces.
D.
Eliminate the human review step that follows Code Execution, since the sandboxed environment already verifies that the code ran without errors.
E.
Define a brief output-verification step in which a human reviewer confirms the computed result against an expected range or sanity check before the output advances to downstream consumers.
Options A and E are correct because reliable automation requires controlled inputs and validated outputs. Standardizing the expected input format reduces parsing failures, inconsistent field mappings, and uncontrolled variation between weekly runs. The integration should define required columns, data types, date formats, permitted null values, file naming conventions, and error-handling behaviour. This makes results comparable and supports repeatable testing.
Human verification remains necessary because successful code execution proves only that the program completed without a runtime error. It does not prove that the source data was correct, the implemented calculation matched the business requirement, or the result is operationally reasonable. A sanity check against an expected range, reconciled total, sample calculation, or known baseline helps detect silent logical and data-quality errors before downstream use.
Option B introduces avoidable variability and should instead be handled through standardized preprocessing or explicit adapters. Option C creates an undocumented interface that downstream consumers cannot reliably interpret. Option D confuses sandbox isolation and successful execution with result validation. Anthropic confirms that Code Execution can process files, perform calculations, and generate analytical outputs in a sandbox, but its outputs must still be evaluated against task-specific success criteria. See Anthropic’s Code Execution documentation and evaluation guidance .
================
Contribute your Thoughts:
Chosen Answer:
This is a voting comment (?). You can switch to a simple comment. It is better to Upvote an existing comment if you don't have anything to add.
Submit