The condition for the parameter's additional result is evaluted before the sequence call's status is set to failed. The 'out' parameter additional results are probably being evaluated right after the code module call, so if the the step's status isn't changed by the code module call, then it will still be "Running".
I can see how it would be nice if it worked the way you are asking, but keep in mind for in/out parameters it's typically the same expression/variable in both the 'in' and 'out' additional result, so the time at which the result is logged is important. It has to be done before the code module call for 'in' parameters and after the code module call for 'out' parameters in order to accurately reflect the state of the variables at those points in time. I think the intent is that the additional result for parameters should reflect the state of the variables at the point in time immediately right before the call for 'in' parameters and immediately after the call for 'out' parameters. Thus if you want to conditionally log a value based on the status (where the status is not changed directly by the code module), then using a regular additional result like you discovered is probably the best way to go.
Perhaps for out parameters we could delay logging until the very end, but that might result in a change in behavior if the variable state changes again before that. If you would like for us to consider that or have another idea for how to handle this better please let us know or perhaps post something to the Idea Exchange.
Another possibility is that we could temporarily log the results before and after the code module call, but then not evaluate the condition until the very end and throw out the logged result if the condition is false. That might still cause a change in behavior though if the "Value to Log" expressions have side-effects.
Hope this helps clarify things.
-Doug
