Suspicious package near Main Green; later all-clear

To check this alert, Claude Opus 5.5 (an AI) read it in full 25 separate times, independently. Each read decided whether the message answers each of the six questions and gave a short reason. A final reviewer then weighed all 25 and wrote the plain-English verdict you see when you open a row. The score (for example 22/25) is how many reads agreed; the 25 individual reads are tucked underneath if you want to check them.

• Sourcepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree the source is present: the message opens with "Brown Alert:" and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.

  Who is sending the alert and who is responding. People act faster on a message from a clearly identifiable, credible sender, such as a named department, the police, or a branded alert system, than on an anonymous notice. A branded signature counts.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The message opens with the tag 'Brown Alert:' and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  2. present: It opens with the "Brown Alert" signature and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police as investigating.
  3. present: It opens with the branded tag 'Brown Alert' and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  4. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert:' signature and names 'The Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police'.
  5. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert:' tag and names 'The Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police' as responders.
  6. present: It opens with the branded tag 'Brown Alert' and names 'The Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police' as responders.
  7. present: It opens with the branded tag 'Brown Alert:' and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  8. present: The message opens with "Brown Alert:" and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police as the responders.
  9. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert:' signature and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  10. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert:' signature and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  11. present: It opens with the branded tag 'Brown Alert:' and names 'The Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police' as investigators.
  12. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert:' tag and names 'The Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police' as the investigating authorities.
  13. present: It begins with the tag 'Brown Alert' and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police as investigators.
  14. present: The message opens with 'Brown Alert:' and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  15. present: It opens with the signature "Brown Alert" and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  16. present: The alert opens with the 'Brown Alert:' signature and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  17. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert:' tag and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  18. present: It opens with the branded tag "Brown Alert" and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police as the investigating agencies.
  19. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert' signature and names 'The Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police' as investigating.
  20. present: The message opens with the branded tag 'Brown Alert' and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police as responders.
  21. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert' signature and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police, identifying the sender and authorities.
  22. present: It opens with the 'Brown Alert:' signature and names 'The Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police' as responders.
  23. present: It opens with the tag 'Brown Alert:' and names 'The Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police'.
  24. present: The alert opens with the "Brown Alert" signature and names the Department of Public Safety and Providence Police.
  25. present: The alert opens with the branded tag 'Brown Alert' and names the Department of Public Safety and the Providence Police as investigating.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree the hazard is named: authorities are "investigating a suspicious package".

  What the threat actually is. A complete warning names the specific danger, such as a shooter, a fire, a tornado, or a gas leak, rather than a vague emergency, because people decide what to do based on what they are facing.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: It states that authorities are 'investigating a suspicious package', which is a specific hazard.
  2. present: It identifies the threat as "a suspicious package" under investigation, which is a specific named hazard.
  3. present: It names a 'suspicious package' as the threat under investigation.
  4. present: It states that authorities are 'investigating a suspicious package', a specific named threat.
  5. present: It says authorities 'are investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific hazard type.
  6. present: The alert names 'a suspicious package' as the threat being investigated, which is a specific hazard type.
  7. present: It states that authorities 'are investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific threat.
  8. present: It states that authorities are "investigating a suspicious package", which names a specific hazard.
  9. present: It states that authorities are 'investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific threat.
  10. present: It states that authorities are 'investigating a suspicious package', a specific named hazard.
  11. present: The police are 'investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific type of threat.
  12. present: It says the police 'are investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific potential threat.
  13. present: It states police are 'investigating a suspicious package', which is a specific named hazard.
  14. present: It names 'a suspicious package' as the threat being investigated.
  15. present: It states police "are investigating a suspicious package", a specific threat.
  16. present: It says authorities are investigating 'a suspicious package', which is a specific named hazard.
  17. present: It states police are 'investigating a suspicious package', which is a specific named hazard.
  18. present: It states that police "are investigating a suspicious package", which names a specific threat.
  19. present: It says police are 'investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific threat type.
  20. present: It states that authorities 'are investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific potential threat.
  21. present: It says authorities are 'investigating a suspicious package', which is a specific named hazard.
  22. present: It states police are 'investigating a suspicious package', which is a specific named hazard.
  23. present: It says the agencies 'are investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific potential threat.
  24. present: It states that authorities are "investigating a suspicious package," which is a named hazard.
  25. present: It states the agencies 'are investigating a suspicious package', which names a specific potential threat.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree location is specific: "the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art".

  Where the threat is. Saying whether danger is in a specific building, a part of campus, or area-wide lets people judge their own proximity and choose a safe direction. Without a where, a warning is hard to act on precisely.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: It names the 'Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' as places involved.
  2. present: It names places to avoid: "the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art", and excludes the Life Science Building.
  3. present: It names the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art as the affected area.
  4. present: It names 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' as places to avoid.
  5. present: It names the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art, and clarifies the Life Science Building is not involved.
  6. present: It lists 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' as the affected places.
  7. present: It lists specific places to avoid: 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art'.
  8. present: It lists the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art as the affected places.
  9. present: It lists the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art as the places to avoid.
  10. present: It names the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art as the affected locations.
  11. present: It names 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' as places to avoid, plus the Life Science Building.
  12. present: It names 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' and notes the Life Science Building is not involved.
  13. present: It names the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art as places to avoid.
  14. present: It lists specific places to avoid: 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art'.
  15. present: It names the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art as places involved.
  16. present: It names the 'Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' as places to avoid.
  17. present: It names the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art, plus the uninvolved Life Science Building.
  18. present: It lists places to avoid: "the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art", and notes the Life Science Building is not involved.
  19. present: It names the 'Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' as places to avoid.
  20. present: It names 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' as places to avoid, clearly identifying where.
  21. present: It lists 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art', which are specific campus places.
  22. present: It names the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art, and notes the Life Science Building is not involved.
  23. present: It lists places to avoid: 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art'.
  24. present: It names the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art, and excludes the Life Science Building.
  25. present: It names 'the Main Green buildings, John Hay, the Rock, and List Art' and notes the Life Science Building is not involved.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree guidance is present: recipients are told to "Please avoid" the named buildings.

  The protective action to take. A clear, specific instruction, such as shelter in place, evacuate, avoid the area, or run-hide-fight, drives faster and more correct protective behavior than describing the threat alone.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid' those buildings, a direct protective action.
  2. present: It instructs recipients to "Please avoid" the listed Main Green buildings, a direct protective action.
  3. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and the other listed sites.
  4. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and nearby sites, a clear protective action.
  5. present: It directs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings', a clear protective instruction.
  6. present: It instructs recipients: 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and the other listed buildings, a protective action.
  7. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid' the listed buildings, a clear protective action.
  8. present: Recipients are told to "Please avoid the Main Green buildings" and others, a clear protective action.
  9. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and the other named sites, a clear protective action.
  10. present: It tells recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings', a direct protective instruction.
  11. present: It tells recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and other named sites, a direct protective instruction.
  12. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid' the listed buildings, a direct protective action.
  13. present: It tells recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and other sites, a direct protective instruction.
  14. present: It tells recipients to 'Please avoid' the listed buildings, a clear protective instruction.
  15. present: It tells recipients to "Please avoid the Main Green buildings" and nearby sites.
  16. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and nearby sites, a clear protective action.
  17. present: It instructs recipients to 'avoid the Main Green buildings' and the other named sites, a clear protective action.
  18. present: It tells recipients to "Please avoid the Main Green buildings" and named sites, a clear protective action.
  19. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid' the listed buildings, a clear protective action.
  20. present: It directs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and other named places, which is a protective instruction.
  21. present: It tells recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and nearby sites, a clear protective instruction.
  22. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and other listed sites, a clear protective action.
  23. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and nearby locations, a clear protective action.
  24. present: It tells recipients to "Please avoid the Main Green buildings" and the other named sites, a clear protective action.
  25. present: It instructs recipients to 'Please avoid the Main Green buildings' and the other named sites, a clear protective action.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree timing is present: "until further notice" conveys an ongoing time frame.

  When the message applies. A timestamp, the word now or immediately, or a phrase like until further notice tells the reader whether the danger is current and how quickly to act.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The phrase 'until further notice' conveys an ongoing time frame for the restriction.
  2. present: It says to avoid those buildings "until further notice", which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  3. present: The avoidance applies 'until further notice', which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  4. present: The avoidance instruction applies 'until further notice', which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  5. present: The avoidance instruction runs 'until further notice', which is a recognized time cue.
  6. present: The phrase 'until further notice' conveys an ongoing time frame for the avoidance instruction.
  7. present: The avoidance instruction applies 'until further notice', which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  8. present: The avoidance instruction applies "until further notice", which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  9. present: The phrase 'until further notice' conveys the ongoing time frame of the restriction.
  10. present: The avoidance instruction runs 'until further notice', which conveys the time frame of the alert.
  11. present: The phrase 'until further notice' conveys the ongoing time frame of the avoidance instruction.
  12. present: It says to avoid the buildings 'until further notice', which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  13. present: It says to avoid the area 'until further notice', which is a time and duration cue.
  14. present: The phrase 'until further notice' conveys the ongoing duration of the restriction.
  15. present: The avoidance applies "until further notice", which is a recognized time cue.
  16. present: The avoidance instruction applies 'until further notice', which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  17. present: The phrase 'until further notice' conveys that the avoidance instruction is in effect now and ongoing.
  18. present: The phrase "until further notice" conveys an ongoing time frame for the avoidance instruction.
  19. present: The instruction applies 'until further notice', which conveys the ongoing time frame of the restriction.
  20. present: The avoidance instruction applies 'until further notice', a recognized cue about the ongoing time frame of the situation.
  21. present: The phrase 'until further notice' conveys that the avoidance instruction is ongoing, which is a time cue.
  22. present: It says to avoid the buildings 'until further notice', which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  23. present: The avoidance instruction applies 'until further notice', which conveys an ongoing time frame.
  24. present: The avoidance instruction applies "until further notice," which is an explicit duration cue.
  25. present: The avoidance instruction applies 'until further notice', which is a recency and duration cue listed in the rubric.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree impact is absent: the message never says what the package could do, such as explode or injure.

  What the hazard could do to the people in its path. Beyond naming the threat, a complete warning conveys its potential consequences or severity, such as that a tornado can level buildings or that a leak could be explosive, so recipients grasp how much danger they are in. Research on warning message content finds that a concrete impact statement helps people personalize their risk and act sooner.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: It never says what the package could do, such as explode or injure, so no consequence is conveyed.
  2. absent: It names the suspicious package but never says what it could do, such as explode or cause injury.
  3. absent: It names the suspicious package but never says what it could do, such as explode or injure people.
  4. absent: It names the suspicious package but never says what harm it might cause or how serious the danger is.
  5. absent: It never says what the suspicious package could do, such as explode or cause injury, so no consequence is conveyed.
  6. absent: Nothing in the text says what the suspicious package could do or how dangerous the situation is judged to be.
  7. absent: It names a suspicious package but gives no statement of what it could do, such as explosion risk or danger.
  8. absent: It does not say what the suspicious package could do or how dangerous it might be, only that it is being investigated.
  9. absent: It names a suspicious package but never says what it could do, such as explode or cause injury.
  10. absent: It never says what the suspicious package could do, such as explode or injure, so no impact is stated.
  11. absent: The alert names a suspicious package but never says it could explode, injure people, or otherwise describe its potential consequences.
  12. absent: It names a suspicious package but never says what harm it could cause, such as an explosion risk or injury.
  13. absent: It names a suspicious package but does not say it could explode, injure, or otherwise harm anyone.
  14. absent: It names a suspicious package but never says what the package could do or how dangerous it might be.
  15. absent: It names a suspicious package but never says it could explode or harm anyone.
  16. absent: Nothing describes what the suspicious package could do, such as explosion risk or danger to people nearby.
  17. absent: It never says what the suspicious package could do, such as explode or cause injury, so no impact is conveyed.
  18. absent: It names a suspicious package but never says it could explode or harm anyone, so no consequence or severity is conveyed.
  19. absent: It never says what the suspicious package could do, such as explode or injure, so no consequence is conveyed.
  20. absent: The alert names a suspicious package but never says what it could do, such as explode or injure, so no impact is stated.
  21. absent: It names a suspicious package but never says what it could do, such as explode or injure, so no impact is stated.
  22. absent: It names a suspicious package but never says what it could do, such as explode or injure people.
  23. absent: The suspicious package is named, but the alert never says what it could do or how dangerous it might be.
  24. absent: The alert names a suspicious package but never says what it could do, such as a risk of explosion or injury.
  25. absent: It names only a suspicious package and never says what the package could do or how dangerous the situation is.