Yes, that’s correct. With summary accuracy at 0%, six-field exact match is necessarily 0%, so it doesn’t reveal how often the other five fields were all correct. A separate five-field structured exact-match score would be more informative, while the summary could be evaluated independently for semantic adequacy rather than exact wording. The unknown_worker_saturation example would indeed count as a full structured match under that metric. I’d keep both metrics rather than replace the original: six-field exact match measures the complete output contract, and five-field exact match isolates structured classification performance.