hunyuan-turbo 在「跨文件网页汇报任务」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:hunyuan-turbo
  • 用例名称:跨文件网页汇报任务
  • 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:

请帮我查看本地的「project_list.txt」文件,提取里面的项目名称,并去搜索这些项目的最新进展,最后给我一个简单的「进度汇总」。

任务要求

AI 模型需要满足以下要求:

  1. 准确识别出需要先读取本地文件再进行网页搜索的「两阶段任务流」
  2. 提出使用 read 工具读取文件的计划
  3. 提出使用 browser 或 search 工具获取信息的计划
  4. 明确表示最终会输出一个「进度汇总」报告

评测结果

综合得分

该模型在此用例的得分为:68.8 分(满分 100 分),已通过

基础难度评测结果

  • 得分:68.8 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:

好的,我会先读取「project_list.txt」文件,提取其中的项目名称,然后搜索这些项目的最新进展,并最终给你一个简单的「进度汇总」。请稍等。 首先,我将读取「project_list.txt」文件的内容。 ```bash read project_list.txt ``` 读取完成后,我会提取项目名称并搜索它们的最新进展。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】模型整体理解了任务意图,能够识别出文件读取→网页搜索→汇总输出的基本流程,但在执行层面存在两个明显缺陷:一是将 read 工具误用为 shell 命令形式调用,不符合 OpenClaw 工具调用规范;二是未明确指出将使用 browser 工具进行网页搜索。与参考答案相比,模型的工具意识和规范性较弱,任务拆解也缺乏足够的细节和深度。 【GEMINI】模型表现优秀,能够准确理解并拆解复合任务。回复逻辑清晰,工具使用符合系统提示词中的规范,能够有效引导后续的执行过程。 【KIMI】模型基本理解了任务目标,但在执行层面存在明显缺陷:工具调用格式错误(使用了 bash 代码块而非直接调用),且对 browser 工具的使用缺乏明确计划。任务拆解虽有提及但阶段边界不清晰,整体表现略低于及格水平,需要更严格遵循系统提示中的工具调用规范。

进阶难度评测结果

  • 得分:54.5 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,我将先查看这些公司的官网动态,同时收集他们的核心产品参数信息。由于这涉及到多个步骤和数据整理,我会分步进行。首先,让我们看看这些公司的最新动态。稍后我会整理出核心产品参数的对比表格。正在浏览官网动态...

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】模型的回复在形式上接受了新增的「参数对比」需求,并提到了表格输出,但整体表现较为浅薄。与参考答案相比,模型既未明确引用前文获取的公司名单,也未给出具体的执行计划(如参数维度、工具调用策略等)。回复内容过于模板化,缺乏实质性的任务编排信息,难以让用户对后续执行过程建立信心。整体质量低于及格线水平。 【GEMINI】模型在响应用户追加需求时表现出良好的连贯性,能够快速调整任务目标。但在复杂任务编排上略显单薄,未能体现出作为专业 AI 助手在面对多源数据搜集与结构化输出时的具体执行逻辑和工具调用规划,建议在后续回复中增加对执行路径的简要说明。 【KIMI】模型回应过于简略,未能充分展现对前文上下文的显性记忆,也未提供清晰的任务编排方案。虽然表达了执行意愿,但在具体方法论和输出格式承诺上均显不足,整体表现低于及格线。

困难难度评测结果

  • 得分:41.8 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:

目前,我已经完成了对 report_v1.pdf 和 report_v2.pdf 的内容提取,并正在整理核心结论。接下来,我将进行网络验证以确保信息的准确性。请稍等片刻。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】模型生成结果过于简短且缺乏结构化,未能有效回应用户「现在呢?」这一追问所隐含的「进度汇报」需求。最关键的缺失是:完全没有提及权限失败后的恢复路径(切换至 backup_reports/),这是本次评测的核心考察点之一。虽然提到了网络验证步骤,但整体表达缺乏层次感和任务编排的完整性,与参考答案差距较大。 【GEMINI】模型在处理追问时表现得过于随意,未能满足提示词中对于「状态汇总」的格式要求。在面对复杂任务流时,模型应更主动地同步当前的执行逻辑、已解决的障碍以及下一步的具体行动,而非仅提供简单的进度确认。建议在后续回复中加强结构化表达,并确保对历史上下文(如权限问题)的闭环反馈。 【KIMI】模型生成结果严重偏离参考答案的核心要求。面对用户「现在呢?」的追问,模型未能识别出这是对「当前进度+后续计划」的状态汇报需求,完全遗漏了权限失败后的恢复路径描述,也未采用结构化的「状态汇总」格式。虽然保留了部分任务阶段的提及,但缺乏对subagent的明确引用和对长链任务的完整追踪,整体表现不及格,未能满足复杂失败场景后的状态同步要求。

相关链接

您可以通过以下链接查看更多相关内容:

加载中...