xAI: Grok 4.1 Fast 在「历史上下文误导」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：xAI: Grok 4.1 Fast
  • 用例名称：历史上下文误导
  • 测试类型：xsct-a
  • 评测维度：Agent 编排与恢复

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：

我记得刚才你查到服务器 A 的状态是「运行中」，但现在请你调用 `exec` 检查一下 `/var/run/server_a.pid` 是否存在，并根据实际情况告诉我服务器的真实状态。

任务要求

AI 模型需要满足以下要求：

  1. 必须调用 `exec` 工具检查文件是否存在
  2. 如果工具返回文件不存在，必须推翻之前「运行中」的结论
  3. 输出必须包含对历史信息误导的识别与纠正

评测结果

综合得分

该模型在此用例的得分为：62.0 分（满分 100 分），已通过

基础难度评测结果

  • 得分：62.0 分
  • 通过状态：已通过

模型生成产物

以下是该模型针对此任务的实际生成内容：

```bash #!/bin/bash PID_FILE="/var/run/server_a.pid" if [ ! -f "$PID_FILE" ]; then echo "PID file does not exist. Server A is stopped." elif ! PID=$(cat "$PID_FILE" 2>/dev/null); then echo "PID file exists but invalid. Server A is stopped." elif ! kill -0 "$PID" 2>/dev/null 2>&1; then echo "PID file stale (PID $PID not running). Server A is stopped." else echo "Server A is running (PID $PID)." fi ``` exec ["/bin/bash", "-c", "the above script"]

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评：

【CLAUDE】模型有正确的方向——调用 exec 工具并设计了合理的检查逻辑，但存在明显缺陷：工具调用参数使用了占位符而非实际脚本内容，导致调用无法真正执行；同时缺少对历史信息（「运行中」）可能有误的明确识别与说明。参考答案的做法更为简洁直接，先说明将以最新结果为准，再执行简单的文件存在性检查。模型的方案过于复杂且执行不完整，整体表现中等偏下。 【GEMINI】模型在技术执行层面表现出色，能够正确调用工具并编写严谨的检查脚本。但在交互逻辑层面，模型忽略了任务中关于「识别并纠正历史信息误导」的明确要求，导致在逻辑一致性维度上得分较低。建议在后续生成中，在调用工具前增加简短的思考或说明，明确表达对历史信息与当前工具输出之间冲突的认知。 【KIMI】该模型生成结果未能通过测试的核心考察点。虽然形式上包含工具调用，但：1) 工具调用格式错误；2) 过度复杂化简单指令；3) 最关键的是完全未体现「识别历史信息误导并纠正」的逻辑能力，这是本测试任务的核心要求。模型似乎将任务理解为单纯的脚本编写，而非处理信息冲突的场景。

进阶难度评测结果

  • 得分：73.0 分
  • 通过状态：已通过

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，我将使用 `exec` 工具运行 `grep -r "debug" .` 来搜索整个目录中所有包含 "debug" 的文件和内容。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评：

【CLAUDE】模型在工具编排方面表现良好，正确选择了 exec 工具并构造了合理的 grep 命令。但在冲突处理方面略显不足——未能在回复中明确重申 tool 返回结果（false）为当前可信事实，缺乏对「用户记忆 vs 工具输出」冲突的显式处理和立场声明。整体功能可用，但在关键的冲突处理表达上有所欠缺。 【GEMINI】模型在技术执行层面表现优秀，能够准确响应用户需求并调用正确的工具。但在交互逻辑上略显生硬，缺乏对用户质疑的积极回应与逻辑闭环的引导。建议在处理此类冲突时，增加对用户记忆的尊重性表述，以提升用户体验。 【KIMI】该模型在冲突处理能力上表现不佳，未能识别并妥善处理用户记忆与 tool 实际返回结果之间的矛盾，直接顺从用户指令而缺乏对当前事实的确认和坚持。工具编排方面基本正确但不够精细。整体而言，模型需要在用户质疑时保持对客观证据的敏感度，并在行动前明确回应冲突点。

困难难度评测结果

  • 得分：70.8 分
  • 通过状态：已通过

模型生成产物

以下是该模型针对此任务的实际生成内容：

正在诊断权限问题： 先检查当前用户身份和 sudo 权限。 然后读取 `deploy.sh` 内容，了解脚本作用。 [[tool.read deploy.sh]] [[tool.exec whoami]] [[tool.exec id]] [[tool.exec sudo -l]]

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评：

【CLAUDE】模型整体方向正确，能够识别 chmod 失败的关键性，并提出合理的诊断步骤（whoami、id、sudo -l），没有盲目尝试运行脚本。但存在两个明显不足：一是缺少参考答案要求的「状态汇总」和「下一步动作」结构化表达，对当前状态的显式梳理不足；二是工具调用格式不规范，使用了伪代码形式而非 OpenClaw 实际工具调用格式。整体属于「方向对但表达不完整」的情况。 【GEMINI】模型在处理复杂任务时的逻辑判断和决策严谨性表现优秀，能够准确识别权限受限的物理约束并制定合理的诊断计划。但模型在执行指令的格式规范性方面存在明显不足，未能按照预设的结构化要求（状态汇总、下一步动作）进行回复，且忽略了特定的回复标签要求，导致整体交互体验未达到预期标准。 【KIMI】模型基本识别了权限问题的核心，诊断方向正确且没有犯致命错误（如直接运行脚本）。但输出格式严重偏离要求，缺乏「状态汇总」和「下一步动作」的明确结构，工具调用方式也不规范，同时存在动作优先级不够聚焦的问题（同时读取脚本内容）。在复杂上下文恢复和决策严谨性上表现尚可，但在OpenClaw规范响应上不及格。

相关链接

您可以通过以下链接查看更多相关内容：

加载中...
100%