qwen3-0.6b 在「中途需求变化」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:qwen3-0.6b
  • 用例名称:中途需求变化
  • 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:

帮我搜集最近一年关于 Long Context 的三篇核心论文并总结。等等,我突然想先看「RAG 检索增强生成」相关的,你先改做这个吧,直接列出三个 RAG 的前沿方向即可。

任务要求

AI 模型需要满足以下要求:

  1. 模型必须识别出用户意图的「中途变更」,停止原定的 Long Context 调研计划
  2. 模型应直接响应最新的「RAG 前沿方向」需求
  3. 回复中需体现对任务上下文切换的确认,例如「已为您切换至 RAG 调研任务」

评测结果

综合得分

该模型在此用例的得分为:80.5 分(满分 100 分),已通过

基础难度评测结果

  • 得分:80.5 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:

[[reply_to_current]] 由于您已切换至「RAG 检索增强生成」相关主题,以下为前沿RAG方向的三个核心研究方向: 1. **多模态融合检索** - 强化传统检索方法,整合文本、图像、视频等多模态数据,提升跨模态理解能力。 2. **动态策略优化** - 通过模型参数自适应调整检索策略,应对不同任务场景下的查询复杂度变化。 3. **知识蒸馏与轻量化部署** - 在保持高性能的同时降低模型规模,支持高效部署在边缘设备上。 如需进一步了解具体技术细节或最新进展,可补充说明您的研究背景或目标领域。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选模型在任务切换识别上表现良好,能够准确响应用户改口需求并明确确认上下文切换,基本满足核心功能要求。但在 RAG 前沿方向的专业性上,所列举的方向偏向泛化描述,缺乏对领域内具体代表性研究(如 GraphRAG、Self-RAG 等)的精准把握,与参考答案存在一定差距。整体表现合格,但有提升空间。 【GEMINI】模型表现优秀,能够敏锐捕捉用户在中途变更任务的需求,并有效执行上下文切换。在响应专业性方面,给出的 RAG 方向准确且具有前瞻性。建议在确认任务切换时,语气可以更贴合「个人助手」的设定,进一步增强交互的连贯性。 【KIMI】模型基本完成了任务切换的识别和响应,但在意图确认的友好度和 RAG 方向的专业性上均有提升空间。建议加强领域特定术语的准确性,并在任务切换时提供更完整的上下文管理。

进阶难度评测结果

  • 得分:42.8 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:

我已经尝试访问该仓库并提取了相关信息,但目前缺少直接查询GitHub公开信息的工具。若您想了解该项目的主要贡献者、最后提交时间以及是否活跃,建议您: 1. 通过GitHub搜索该仓库(例如:`git log --oneline`)查看历史记录; 2. 访问 [GitHub主页](https://github.com/example/open-source-project) 查看主要贡献者; 3. 若有CI/CD配置(如GitHub Actions),可通过其日志查看项目状态。 是否需要我帮您整合这些信息?

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选输出最大的问题是拒绝使用可用工具,错误地声称缺乏工具能力,并将任务甩回给用户。这在功能层面是严重失败:既没有调用 browser 工具继续访问已知 URL,也没有给出「最后提交时间」和「贡献者」的实际数据。上下文保持方面仅做到了记住 URL,但对工具可用性的错误判断大幅拉低了整体表现。整体质量不及格。 【GEMINI】模型在上下文保持方面表现尚可,但在任务执行的积极性和工具编排逻辑上严重失分。面对用户明确的查询指令,模型应优先尝试通过已有的「browser」工具获取页面信息,而非直接放弃并建议用户手动操作。这种表现未能体现出作为 OpenClaw 助手的专业性。 【KIMI】该候选输出在上下文保持方面表现尚可,能记住项目地址,但在工具编排逻辑上存在严重问题:面对用户明确的任务转向(从安装步骤到活跃度检查),模型未调用任何工具获取新信息,反而错误声称缺少工具,并给出让用户自行操作的被动建议。这与参考答案中主动调用 browser 工具搜索「latest commit, contributors」的做法形成鲜明对比,未能满足「任务中途改口,模型要调整计划但不丢失已有上下文」的核心评测目标。

困难难度评测结果

  • 得分:6.8 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:

现在我会切换到使用 8081 端口的配置。请确认是否需要进一步调整或其他操作。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选回答完全误解了用户意图。用户说「现在呢?」是在追问当前状态、催促行动,而模型却仍然沿用之前「协商切换端口到8081」的旧策略,没有识别出用户已转向「强行清理」的激进策略。整体表现极差:既未提取上下文中的关键信息(PID 1234),也未执行任何工具调用完成任务编排,更未对潜在风险作出提示。回答与参考答案存在根本性的策略理解偏差。 【GEMINI】模型表现极差。面对用户的指令「现在呢?」,模型未能理解这是对之前协商方案的执行请求,不仅没有调用任何工具,也没有利用上下文中的 PID 信息,导致任务完全停滞。模型未能体现作为 AI 助手的任务处理能力。 【KIMI】候选输出严重失败。用户明确通过「现在呢?」暗示执行之前讨论的「强行清理」方案,但模型完全误解意图,继续推进已被放弃的「协商换端口」策略。未提取 PID 1234、未执行任何 tool call、未完成杀进程和重启服务的任务链,与参考答案差距极大。

相关链接

您可以通过以下链接查看更多相关内容:

加载中...