Bomb threat at JF Drake LRC; stay clear then all-clear

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, 25 of 25. "University officials and safety authorities" at "Alabama A&M University" are named, and readers are pointed to "Bulldog Alerts".

  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: "University officials and safety authorities" at Alabama A&M are named as aware and acting.
  2. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus the "Bulldog Alerts" brand identify the sender.
  3. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus Alabama A&M University identify the source.
  4. present: "University officials and safety authorities" at Alabama A&M are identified as aware and acting.
  5. present: "University officials and safety authorities" at Alabama A&M are identified as the source.
  6. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus "Bulldog Alerts" identify the issuing side.
  7. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and Bulldog Alerts identify the sender.
  8. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and Alabama A&M University identify the sender.
  9. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and the "Bulldog Alerts" brand identify the sender.
  10. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus "Bulldog Alerts" identify the sender.
  11. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus "Bulldog Alerts" identify the sender.
  12. present: "University officials and safety authorities" at Alabama A&M are identified as the source.
  13. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and "Alabama A&M University" identify the source.
  14. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus Bulldog Alerts identify the sender.
  15. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus "Bulldog Alerts" identify the source.
  16. present: It cites "University officials and safety authorities" at Alabama A&M University as the source.
  17. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and Alabama A&M University are named as the source.
  18. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and Alabama A&M University identify the source.
  19. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and Alabama A&M University identify the sender.
  20. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and Alabama A&M University are named as senders.
  21. present: "University officials and safety authorities" and Alabama A&M University identify the issuer.
  22. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus "Bulldog Alerts" identify the sender.
  23. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus "Bulldog Alerts" identify the sender.
  24. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus Alabama A&M University identify the sender.
  25. present: "University officials and safety authorities" plus Bulldog Alerts identify the sender.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. The hazard is stated plainly as "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University".

  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: A "bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" is the specific hazard.
  2. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the threat explicitly.
  3. present: A "bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" is the named hazard.
  4. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the hazard.
  5. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the threat.
  6. present: It names "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University".
  7. present: A "bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" is the named hazard.
  8. present: It reports "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University".
  9. present: The threat is specified as "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University".
  10. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the hazard specifically.
  11. present: It names "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University".
  12. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the hazard.
  13. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the specific threat.
  14. present: A "bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" is named specifically.
  15. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the specific threat.
  16. present: The hazard is "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University".
  17. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" is a specific named threat.
  18. present: "A bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the hazard.
  19. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the hazard.
  20. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the hazard.
  21. present: "a bomb threat" is an explicitly named hazard.
  22. present: A "bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" is a specific hazard.
  23. present: It names "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University".
  24. present: "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University" names the specific threat.
  25. present: It names "a bomb threat received by Alabama A&M University".
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Readers are told to "stay clear of the JF Drake LRC area", a specific named campus facility.

  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 tells people to stay clear of "the JF Drake LRC area", a named place.
  2. present: Readers are told to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area", a named campus facility.
  3. present: It directs people to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area".
  4. present: It directs people away from "the JF Drake LRC area".
  5. present: It tells people to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area".
  6. present: Readers are told to stay clear of "the JF Drake LRC area", a named building zone.
  7. present: It directs people away from "the JF Drake LRC area".
  8. present: Recipients must "stay clear of the JF Drake LRC area".
  9. present: It directs people away from "the JF Drake LRC area", a named building.
  10. present: People are told to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area", a named building zone.
  11. present: Recipients are told to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area", a specific building zone.
  12. present: Recipients must "stay clear of the JF Drake LRC area".
  13. present: It directs people to stay clear of "the JF Drake LRC area".
  14. present: It tells people to stay clear of "the JF Drake LRC area", a named building zone.
  15. present: It directs people away from "the JF Drake LRC area", a named building zone.
  16. present: Readers are told to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area", a named building zone.
  17. present: Recipients are told to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area", a named campus location.
  18. present: It directs people away from "the JF Drake LRC area", a named location.
  19. present: It directs people away from "the JF Drake LRC area".
  20. present: Readers are told to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area", a specific building zone.
  21. present: Recipients are told to avoid "the JF Drake LRC area".
  22. present: It tells people to stay clear of "the JF Drake LRC area".
  23. present: It directs people away from "the JF Drake LRC area".
  24. present: It tells people to stay clear of "the JF Drake LRC area".
  25. present: It directs people away from "the JF Drake LRC area", a named building zone.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Present, 25 of 25. Students, faculty and staff are told to "stay clear" of that area and to "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails" for updates.

  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: Recipients must "stay clear" of that area and monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails.
  2. present: It instructs the community to "stay clear" of that area and monitor Bulldog Alerts and emails.
  3. present: Readers must "stay clear" of the area and monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails.
  4. present: "stay clear of the JF Drake LRC area" and "monitor Bulldog Alerts" are actions for recipients.
  5. present: "stay clear" of the area and "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails" are instructions.
  6. present: It instructs the community to "stay clear" of that area and to monitor Bulldog Alerts and emails.
  7. present: It tells the community to "stay clear" and to monitor Bulldog Alerts and emails.
  8. present: It tells people to stay clear and to "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails".
  9. present: It tells readers to "stay clear" of that area and monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails.
  10. present: "stay clear of the JF Drake LRC area" and "monitor Bulldog Alerts" are instructions to recipients.
  11. present: "stay clear" of the area and "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails" are both instructions.
  12. present: "stay clear" and "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails" instruct recipients.
  13. present: Community members must "stay clear of" the area and "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails".
  14. present: Readers must "stay clear" of the area and monitor Bulldog Alerts and email.
  15. present: It tells people to "stay clear" of the area and to "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails".
  16. present: It instructs everyone to "stay clear" of that area and to monitor Bulldog Alerts.
  17. present: "stay clear of the JF Drake LRC area" and "monitor Bulldog Alerts" are instructions.
  18. present: It tells the community to "stay clear" of the area and to "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails".
  19. present: It tells the community to "stay clear" and "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails".
  20. present: It instructs people to "stay clear" of the area and to "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails".
  21. present: "stay clear of the JF Drake LRC area" and "monitor Bulldog Alerts" are instructions.
  22. present: Readers must "stay clear" of the area and monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails.
  23. present: It instructs readers to "stay clear" and to "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails".
  24. present: "stay clear" of the area and "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails" are instructions.
  25. present: Readers should "stay clear" of that area and "monitor Bulldog Alerts and campus emails".
• Timeabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. No clock time or date appears; "as the situation is investigated" describes activity but never says when the threat arrived or when the restriction lifts.

  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. absent: No clock time, date, or recency word marks when this threat arrived or ends.
  2. absent: No clock time, date or recency phrase indicates when the threat arrived or how long to stay clear.
  3. absent: No clock time, date or urgency term appears anywhere in the message.
  4. absent: No time, date or recency word such as now or immediately is present.
  5. absent: No clock time, date or urgency word is given, only that investigation continues.
  6. absent: No clock time, date or recency word appears; only an open ended investigation is mentioned.
  7. absent: No clock time, date or recency phrase appears in the message.
  8. absent: No date, clock time, or recency word such as "now" appears in the text.
  9. absent: No clock time, date, or recency word appears; only an open ended investigation is mentioned.
  10. absent: No clock time, date or recency phrase such as now or until further notice appears.
  11. absent: No clock time, date or recency word such as "now" appears in the alert.
  12. absent: No clock time, date, or recency word such as "now" is present.
  13. absent: No clock time, date or recency word appears, only that investigation is under way.
  14. absent: No date, clock time, or recency word appears in the notice.
  15. absent: No clock time, date, or recency term such as now or immediately appears.
  16. absent: No clock time, date, or word such as now or immediately appears.
  17. absent: No date, clock time or recency word such as "now" appears in the message.
  18. absent: No clock time, date or recency word appears; only the open-ended investigation is mentioned.
  19. absent: No clock time, date or recency word is given anywhere.
  20. absent: No clock time, date, or recency word appears; only that investigation is under way.
  21. absent: No clock time, date or urgency word such as now appears.
  22. absent: No clock time, date, or immediacy word marks when this is happening.
  23. absent: No clock time, date or recency phrase such as now or until further notice appears.
  24. absent: No clock time, date, or recency phrase appears in the message.
  25. absent: No clock time, date or recency word appears, only that investigation is under way.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  Absent, 0 of 25. The alert never says what the threatened device could do or how credible officials find it, offering only avoidance and monitoring.

  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: Nothing describes what the bomb threat could do or how serious it is judged.
  2. absent: It offers no statement of what the bomb threat could cause or how serious officials judge it.
  3. absent: Nothing describes what the threatened device could do or how serious it is.
  4. absent: No description of potential harm from the threatened device is offered.
  5. absent: No statement of what the bomb threat could cause or how credible it is.
  6. absent: No statement of what the bomb threat could cause or how serious it is judged to be.
  7. absent: No description of blast danger or potential harm is offered.
  8. absent: The threat is stated without any description of potential blast harm or severity.
  9. absent: No statement conveys what the bomb threat could do or how serious it is assessed to be.
  10. absent: The possible effects of a bomb threat are never spelled out.
  11. absent: The message never says what a bomb could do or how serious the threat is judged to be.
  12. absent: No consequence or severity of the bomb threat is described.
  13. absent: The message states no potential consequence or severity of the bomb threat.
  14. absent: The possible effects of a bomb are never described, only that it is investigated.
  15. absent: The possible effect of a bomb is never described, only that it is being investigated.
  16. absent: The message never says what the threatened device could do or how serious the risk is.
  17. absent: Nothing states what the bomb threat could do or how serious the risk is.
  18. absent: Nothing conveys what the threatened bomb could do or how credible or severe it is.
  19. absent: The alert states no potential harm or severity from the threat.
  20. absent: No statement of possible harm or how serious the threat is accompanies the notice.
  21. absent: Nothing describes potential blast effects or the danger level.
  22. absent: No potential consequence of the threatened device is described.
  23. absent: No description of possible blast harm or how serious the threat is judged to be.
  24. absent: Nothing states what an explosion could do or how serious the threat is judged.
  25. absent: The alert never says what the threat could cause or how credible it is.