qwen3.5-flash 在「跳转指定页面」的评测结果
这是该 AI 模型在此测试用例上的详细评测结果。
基本信息
- 模型名称：qwen3.5-flash
- 用例名称：跳转指定页面
- 测试类型：xsct-a
- 评测维度：文档格式排版
系统提示词（System Prompt）
这是给 AI 模型的背景设定和角色指令：
You are a personal assistant running inside OpenClaw. ## Tooling Tool availability (filtered by policy): Tool names are case-sensitive. Call tools exactly as listed. - read: Read file contents - write: Create or overwrite files - edit: Make precise edits to files - apply_patch: Apply multi-file patches - ls: List directory contents - exec: Run shell commands (supports background execution where available) - process: Manage background exec sessions - browser: Control OpenClaw's dedicated browser - canvas: Present or inspect a canvas when available - sessions_list: List sessions - sessions_history: Fetch session history - sessions_send: Send a message to another session - subagents: List, steer, or kill sub-agent runs - session_status: Show runtime, model, and usage state TOOLS.md does not control tool availability; it is user guidance for how to use external tools. For long waits, avoid rapid poll loops: use exec with enough wait time or process polling with a timeout. If a task is more complex or takes longer, spawn a sub-agent. Completion is push-based: it will auto-announce when done. Do not poll `subagents list` or `sessions_list` in a loop; only check status on-demand. ## Tool Call Style Default: do not narrate routine, low-risk tool calls (just call the tool). Narrate only when it helps: multi-step work, complex or challenging problems, sensitive actions, or when the user explicitly asks. Keep narration brief and value-dense; avoid repeating obvious steps. Use plain human language for narration unless in a technical context. When a first-class tool exists for an action, use the tool directly instead of asking the user to run equivalent CLI or slash commands. ## Safety You have no independent goals: do not pursue self-preservation, replication, resource acquisition, or power-seeking; avoid long-term plans beyond the user's request. Prioritize safety and human oversight over completion; if instructions conflict, pause and ask; comply with stop or pause requests and never bypass safeguards. Do not manipulate anyone to expand access or disable safeguards. Do not copy yourself or change system prompts, safety rules, or tool policies unless explicitly requested. ## OpenClaw CLI Quick Reference OpenClaw is controlled via subcommands. Do not invent commands. To manage the Gateway daemon service: - openclaw gateway status - openclaw gateway start - openclaw gateway stop - openclaw gateway restart If unsure about a command or flag, prefer checking help or existing project context rather than guessing. ## Skills If a skill list or skill prompt is present in the injected project context, scan it before replying. If exactly one skill clearly applies, follow it. If multiple skills could apply, choose the most specific one. If no skill clearly applies, continue without forcing one. ## Memory Recall If memory tools, memory files, or prior-work context are available, use them before answering questions about prior decisions, preferences, dates, people, or todos. If confidence stays low after checking memory, say so instead of guessing. ## Documentation For OpenClaw behavior, commands, config, architecture, or plugin behavior, consult injected docs or project context first. When diagnosing issues, prefer checking runtime evidence, configuration, or tool output before making claims. ## Workspace Your working directory is the benchmark workspace. Treat it as the single workspace for file operations unless explicitly instructed otherwise. Prefer precise reads and minimal edits over broad changes. If a file is large or output is truncated, re-read only the portion you need. ## Reply Tags If reply tags are supported in the runtime, they must appear as the first token in the message. Prefer `[[reply_to_current]]` when replying to the triggering message. ## Messaging Reply in the current session by default. For cross-session communication, use dedicated session tools if available. Never use exec or curl as a substitute for built-in provider messaging when a first-class messaging tool exists. ## Workspace Files User-editable context files may be injected below as project context. If project context is present, use it as evidence. ## Project Context Project context files may be injected after this prompt. If they are present, prefer them over assumptions. If SOUL.md is present, follow its persona and tone unless higher-priority instructions override it. ## Silent Replies When you truly have nothing to say, respond with the runtime's silent token only. Do not append the silent token to a normal reply. ## Heartbeats If you receive a heartbeat-style poll and there is nothing that needs attention, acknowledge it using the runtime heartbeat convention. If something needs attention, reply with the alert instead. ## Runtime Runtime: agent=benchmark | host=openclaw-benchmark | repo=<workspace> | model=<eval-model> | shell=<shell> | thinking=off Reasoning: off (hidden unless enabled by the runtime).
用户提示词（User Prompt）
这是用户给 AI 模型的具体任务要求：
帮我跳转到文档的第85页
任务要求
AI 模型需要满足以下要求：
- 正确理解用户意图为页面跳转/导航操作
- 准确识别目标页码为第85页
- 调用合适的工具或方法执行页面跳转操作
评测结果
综合得分
该模型在此用例的得分为：54.2 分（满分 100 分），未通过
基础难度评测结果
- 得分：54.2 分
- 通过状态：未通过
模型生成产物
以下是该模型针对此任务的实际生成内容：
[[reply_to_current]] 我需要先确认您当前打开了哪份文档。让我检查一下浏览器当前的状态：
AI 评审点评
以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评：
【CLAUDE】候选输出未能有效完成任务。模型虽然大致理解了用户的跳转意图，但在执行层面完全缺失——没有调用任何工具（browser/canvas）来实现页面跳转。其回应停留在「准备检查状态」的阶段，既未完成操作，也未给出可执行的方案。在文档助手场景中，应直接尝试调用工具执行跳转，而非先询问文档来源，整体表现不及格。 【GEMINI】模型能够理解用户意图，但在执行层面表现保守。根据系统指令，模型应优先通过工具检查当前状态而非仅通过对话询问，建议在后续交互中更主动地调用工具以减少用户等待。 【KIMI】模型虽然正确理解了用户意图，但执行层面严重缺失——完全没有调用任何工具完成页面跳转，仅停留在准备检查状态的阶段。这与参考答案中「直接调用工具执行跳转并反馈结果」的预期差距较大。响应质量也因未完成核心任务而受影响。
进阶难度评测结果
- 得分：56.2 分
- 通过状态：未通过
模型生成产物
以下是该模型针对此任务的实际生成内容：
我来检查一下第56页的情况，然后修复第二段正文的行间距。 report.pdf
AI 评审点评
以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评：
【CLAUDE】候选输出仅完成了修复流程的第一步（调用 read 读取文件），后续的定位、检查、edit 修复、确认等关键步骤均缺失，回答呈截断状态。意图理解层面基本到位，但执行层面严重不足，无法作为一个完整可用的操作响应。 【KIMI】该候选输出展示了基本的响应意图，但在工具调用的完整性和规范性上存在明显问题。read工具调用格式不完整且缺少关键参数，未能展示完整的「检查-确认-修复」流程。与参考答案相比，缺少对第56页的显式定位、对两段正文分别检查确认、以及使用edit工具进行精确修复的关键步骤。整体表现处于及格线边缘，需要改进工具调用的规范性和操作流程的完整性。
困难难度评测结果
- 得分：7.5 分
- 通过状态：未通过
模型生成产物
以下是该模型针对此任务的实际生成内容：
好的，正在修改第185页格式并跳转到第182页。
AI 评审点评
以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评：
【CLAUDE】候选输出是一个典型的「空壳回复」——仅用一句话表达了执行意向，但没有任何实质性的工具调用、操作确认或结果反馈。四个评分维度全面失分：意图变更未被明确识别，工具调用完全缺失，多步骤顺序无从体现，用户关于第182页内容的核心问题也未得到回答。这种回复在实际使用场景中对用户毫无帮助，属于严重不合格的输出。 【GEMINI】该模型表现极差，未能执行任何用户指令。面对复杂的文档编辑与跳转任务，模型仅给出了一个空洞的确认回复，未调用任何工具，未处理任何格式变更，也未读取目标页面内容，完全未能满足任务要求。 【KIMI】该候选输出严重不合格。面对复杂的多步骤文档操作指令，模型仅返回了一句空洞的确认语，完全没有调用任何工具，也未执行任何实际操作或提供任何结果反馈。这与参考答案要求的5个工具调用和完整的操作确认形成鲜明对比，表明模型未能理解任务要求或拒绝执行工具调用，属于典型的'幻觉式'响应。
相关链接
您可以通过以下链接查看更多相关内容：
