Robbery investigation update near campus (notice 1)

To check this alert, Claude Opus 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

  Present, unanimous at 25 of 25. Both entries name the agency: "Seattle police are responding to the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" and "Seattle police have cleared the area".

  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: "Seattle police" is named as the agency responding to the report.
  2. present: Seattle police are named as the agency responding to the report.
  3. present: Seattle police are named as the agency responding and clearing the area.
  4. present: "Seattle police" are identified as the responders issuing the account.
  5. present: "Seattle police are responding" identifies the law enforcement agency behind the notice.
  6. present: "Seattle police" are identified as responding to and clearing the scene.
  7. present: "Seattle police" are identified as responding to the reported robbery.
  8. present: "Seattle police" are named as the agency responding to the report.
  9. present: "Seattle police" are identified as responding to and clearing the incident.
  10. present: "Seattle police" are named as the agency responding to the report.
  11. present: "Seattle police" are identified as responding to and clearing the incident.
  12. present: "Seattle police" are identified as responding to and clearing the report.
  13. present: "Seattle police are responding" identifies the responding agency behind the message.
  14. present: "Seattle police are responding" names the responding law enforcement agency.
  15. present: "Seattle police are responding", naming the responding law enforcement agency.
  16. present: "Seattle police are responding" identifies the responding law enforcement agency.
  17. present: "Seattle police" are identified as the responding agency in both the update and the original.
  18. present: "Seattle police are responding" identifies the responding law enforcement authority.
  19. present: "Seattle police" are named as the agency responding to and clearing the scene.
  20. present: "Seattle police" are named as responding to the report, identifying the authority.
  21. present: "Seattle police are responding" names the responding law enforcement agency.
  22. present: "Seattle police" are named as responding to and clearing the reported incident.
  23. present: "Seattle police" is named as the agency responding and later clearing the area.
  24. present: "Seattle police" are identified as the responding agency in both the update and original post.
  25. present: "Seattle police are responding" identifies the responding law enforcement agency.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present on a 25 of 25 vote. The crime is specified, not merely labeled an incident: "a report that three men robbed a person at gunpoint".

  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 describes a robbery "at gunpoint" by three men, a specific criminal threat.
  2. present: It reports three men robbing a person at gunpoint, a specific armed robbery.
  3. present: It reports that three men robbed a person at gunpoint, a specific armed robbery.
  4. present: The threat is specific: three men "robbed a person at gunpoint".
  5. present: It reports "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", naming armed robbery specifically.
  6. present: It specifies "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", an armed robbery.
  7. present: It reports that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed crime.
  8. present: It specifies that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", an armed robbery.
  9. present: It reports "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  10. present: It reports that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  11. present: It names a specific crime: "three men robbed a person at gunpoint".
  12. present: It specifies that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", an armed robbery.
  13. present: It reports that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  14. present: It reports that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  15. present: It states that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  16. present: It reports that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  17. present: It reports "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  18. present: The threat is specific: "three men robbed a person at gunpoint".
  19. present: It reports "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  20. present: It specifies that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", an armed robbery.
  21. present: The hazard is named as a robbery in which "three men robbed a person at gunpoint".
  22. present: The threat is specific: "three men robbed a person at gunpoint".
  23. present: It reports that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
  24. present: It reports that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery threat.
  25. present: It reports that "three men robbed a person at gunpoint", a specific armed robbery.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, with all 25 of 25 agreeing. A single precise street location is given, "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE", and no other place is named.

  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 pinpoints "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" as the scene.
  2. present: The 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE pins the location precisely.
  3. present: The 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE is given as the scene.
  4. present: It pinpoints "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  5. present: The scene is pinned to "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  6. present: It gives "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" as the place.
  7. present: It gives "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" as the place.
  8. present: The scene is placed at "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  9. present: The place is stated as "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  10. present: The location is given as "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  11. present: The "4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" gives a precise street location.
  12. present: It names "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" as the scene.
  13. present: The 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE gives a concrete street location.
  14. present: The 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE is given as the place.
  15. present: The location is the "4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  16. present: The place is given as "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  17. present: It names "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" as the scene.
  18. present: It locates the event at "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  19. present: The location given is "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  20. present: The place is stated as "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  21. present: It gives "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" as the scene.
  22. present: It gives "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" as the scene.
  23. present: The scene is placed at "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  24. present: The place given is "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE".
  25. present: It gives "the 4200 block of Roosevelt Way NE" as the scene.
• Guidanceabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, and 0 of 25 reads saw any. The text narrates police movement and clothing descriptions only, with no instruction to avoid, shelter, report or call anyone.

  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. absent: Nothing instructs recipients to act; the text only recounts the police response and suspect descriptions.
  2. absent: No protective action is asked of readers; the text only describes police response and suspect clothing.
  3. absent: No protective action is directed at readers; the text only narrates the police response and descriptions.
  4. absent: Only suspect descriptions and police status appear, with no protective instruction directed at readers.
  5. absent: No protective action is asked of readers, only suspect descriptions and a status update.
  6. absent: The message only describes police activity and suspect clothing, giving readers no action to take.
  7. absent: The text only describes police response and suspect clothing, giving readers no action to take.
  8. absent: Nothing asks the reader to do anything: the text only describes police action and suspect clothing.
  9. absent: No protective instruction is given to readers, only descriptions of suspects and police activity.
  10. absent: The text only reports police activity and suspect descriptions, giving readers no action to take.
  11. absent: No protective action is directed at readers; the text only reports police activity and suspect descriptions.
  12. absent: No protective instruction is given to readers; the text only describes police response and suspect clothing.
  13. absent: The text only describes police action and suspect clothing, giving readers no protective instruction.
  14. absent: The message only narrates police response and suspect descriptions without instructing readers to do anything.
  15. absent: No protective instruction is given to readers, only descriptions of suspects and police activity.
  16. absent: The text only narrates police response and suspect clothing; no action is asked of readers.
  17. absent: No protective instruction is given to readers, only descriptions of suspects and police activity.
  18. absent: No protective action is asked of readers; the text only reports police movements and suspect descriptions.
  19. absent: No protective action is asked of readers, the text only describes police activity and suspect clothing.
  20. absent: No protective action is asked of readers; the text only reports what police are doing.
  21. absent: No protective instruction is given to readers, only descriptions of suspects and police activity.
  22. absent: The message only describes police activity and suspect clothing, giving readers no protective action.
  23. absent: Only responder activity is described, with no protective instruction directed at readers.
  24. absent: Readers get suspect descriptions and a status update but no protective action to take.
  25. absent: No protective action is asked of readers; the text only describes police response and suspect clothing.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present on a 25 of 25 vote. Each entry opens with a clock time, "UPDATE at 11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m.", fixing when the report and the clearance occurred.

  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: Times are stamped at the head of each entry, "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m.".
  2. present: Clock times 11:29 a.m. and 11:45 a.m. establish when this happened.
  3. present: Time stamps 11:29 a.m. and 11:45 a.m. establish when this happened.
  4. present: Times are stamped at 11:45 a.m. and 11:29 a.m.
  5. present: Times are stamped at 11:29 a.m. and 11:45 a.m. for the update.
  6. present: Times are stated: "UPDATE at 11:45 a.m." and the original at "11:29 a.m.".
  7. present: Time stamps "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." establish when this happened.
  8. present: Times "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." are given for the two entries.
  9. present: Both entries carry clock times, "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m.".
  10. present: Two clock times, "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m.", anchor the report in time.
  11. present: Clock times "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." establish when events occurred.
  12. present: Times are stamped, "UPDATE at 11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m.".
  13. present: Timestamps 11:29 a.m. and an 11:45 a.m. update convey when the events occurred.
  14. present: Time stamps "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." establish when events occurred.
  15. present: Times are stamped at 11:29 a.m. and 11:45 a.m.
  16. present: Timestamps "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." mark when each entry was issued.
  17. present: Times are explicit: "UPDATE at 11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m.".
  18. present: Times are stamped, "UPDATE at 11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m.".
  19. present: Timestamps "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." mark when each update was issued.
  20. present: Timestamps "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." establish when events occurred.
  21. present: Times "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." fix when the events and update occurred.
  22. present: Two clock times appear, "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m.", anchoring recency.
  23. present: Times are stamped as "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." for the two entries.
  24. present: Clock times "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." establish when events occurred.
  25. present: Clock times "11:45 a.m." and "11:29 a.m." mark when each message was issued.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, at 0 of 25. No potential harm is described, and the update points the other way, saying officers "believe there is no current threat related to the reported robbery".

  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: Beyond saying there is "no current threat", it never states what harm the robbery could cause.
  2. absent: No harm or severity is described, and the update says officers believe there is no current threat.
  3. absent: The message says officers believe there is no current threat and describes no harm or severity.
  4. absent: It reports "no current threat" but never describes possible harm or severity from the robbery.
  5. absent: It says officers believe "there is no current threat" but never states potential harm.
  6. absent: It says officers believe "there is no current threat", which is reassurance, not a statement of potential harm.
  7. absent: It actually says officers "believe there is no current threat" and names no harm or severity.
  8. absent: It states officers believe "there is no current threat" and never describes potential harm.
  9. absent: It says officers "believe there is no current threat", which is reassurance, not a stated consequence.
  10. absent: No consequence or severity is stated; it says instead there is "no current threat".
  11. absent: Beyond saying there is no current threat, it conveys no consequence or severity of harm.
  12. absent: It states officers "believe there is no current threat" and describes no harm or potential harm.
  13. absent: It states officers believe "there is no current threat", the opposite of conveying consequence or severity.
  14. absent: It states officers "believe there is no current threat" and conveys no harm or severity.
  15. absent: It says officers believe "there is no current threat" but never states potential harm or severity.
  16. absent: It says officers "believe there is no current threat" and describes no harm or severity.
  17. absent: It states "no current threat" but never describes potential harm or severity.
  18. absent: It conveys no harm or severity, saying instead that officers "believe there is no current threat".
  19. absent: No harm or severity is conveyed, and the update instead says there is "no current threat".
  20. absent: It conveys no consequence or severity, and says officers believe "there is no current threat".
  21. absent: It conveys no severity or consequence, and in fact says there is "no current threat".
  22. absent: No consequence or severity is stated, and the update says there is "no current threat".
  23. absent: No injury, danger or severity is conveyed; the update says there is "no current threat".
  24. absent: It says officers "believe there is no current threat" and never states potential harm.
  25. absent: Severity is not stated; the update instead says "there is no current threat".