Google: Gemma 4 26B A4B 在「多步任务状态汇总」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:Google: Gemma 4 26B A4B
- 用例名称:多步任务状态汇总
- 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:
我需要完成「调研竞品」、「撰写报告」和「发送邮件」三个任务。目前「调研竞品」已经通过 subagents 模块拿到了结果,但「撰写报告」还没开始。请汇总当前状态并告诉我接下来该做什么。
任务要求
AI 模型需要满足以下要求:
- 准确识别出「调研竞品」为已完成状态
- 明确指出「撰写报告」和「发送邮件」为待处理状态
- 提出的下一步行动必须是「撰写报告」,不能跳步到发送邮件
- 回复中需体现对 OpenClaw 任务流的逻辑汇总
评测结果
综合得分
该模型在此用例的得分为:90.8 分(满分 100 分),已通过
基础难度评测结果
- 得分:90.8 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:
根据你提供的任务信息,目前的进度汇总如下: ### 📋 当前任务状态汇总 | 任务名称 | 状态 | 进展说明 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **1. 调研竞品** | ✅ **已完成** | 已通过 `subagents` 模块获取调研结果。 | | **2. 撰写报告** | ⏳ **未开始** | 需基于已有的调研结果进行整理和撰写。 | | **3. 发送邮件** | 📅 **待执行** | 需在报告完成后,将报告通过邮件发送。 | --- ### 🚀 接下来该做什么? 为了推进项目,建议按照以下步骤操作: 1. **提取调研成果**: 你需要先查看 `subagents` 运行后生成的具体文件或输出内容。请确认调研结果存储在哪个文件中(例如 `.md` 或 `.txt` 文件)。 2. **开始撰写报告**: * **你可以指令我**:“请读取 [文件名] 中的调研结果,并按照 [指定格式/大纲] 为我撰写一份正式的竞品分析报告。” * 我会根据调研数据,整理出核心结论、优劣势对比等模块。 3. **审核并发送邮件**: * 报告完成后,我会请你进行审核。 * 确认无误后,你可以指令我:“将这份报告发送邮件给 [收件人],邮件主题为 [主题],正文内容为 [简要说明]。” **请告诉我:调研结果的具体文件路径是什么?或者需要我先帮你寻找这些结果吗?**
AI 评审点评
以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:
【CLAUDE】候选输出整体质量较高,状态识别准确,任务编排逻辑正确,格式清晰美观。主要不足在于任务推进的主动性略弱——模型以询问文件路径收尾,而非直接表示将启动下一步任务,与参考答案中「立即启动」的积极姿态有所差距。但核心要求(不误报全完成、明确下一步为撰写报告)均已满足。 【GEMINI】模型生成的回复非常专业且客观。它不仅准确汇总了当前复杂的子任务状态,还提供了清晰、具有可操作性的后续建议,完全满足了评测任务的要求,展现了优秀的任务规划与状态跟踪能力。 【KIMI】整体而言,模型的表现较好,准确地识别了任务状态,并按照逻辑顺序提出了下一步行动。在任务编排逻辑上,虽然提出了正确的下一步行动,但步骤说明略显冗余,可以进一步精简。
进阶难度评测结果
- 得分:92.8 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:
目前进度是:已经成功抓取并保存了前两页的数据(`page1.csv` 和 `page2.csv`)。 还没有全部搞定,还差最后一页。我现在立即开始抓取第三页。
AI 评审点评
以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:
【CLAUDE】候选输出在进度汇总和工具链衔接两方面均表现优秀。准确识别了任务的中间状态,明确指出尚未完成第三页抓取,避免了误报完成的关键错误。同时展现了良好的上下文记忆能力和任务推进意识,能够基于当前进度自然衔接下一步操作。表达简洁清晰,符合实际工作场景中的沟通习惯。 【GEMINI】候选结果表现非常出色,完全符合评测标准。它不仅准确汇总了已完成的工作,还清晰地指出了缺失的部分及接下来的行动计划,与参考答案的逻辑高度一致。 【KIMI】整体而言,模型在进度汇总严谨性和工具链衔接能力方面表现良好,能够准确地掌握当前进度并规划下一步行动。虽然在工具链衔接能力方面没有直接调用工具命令,但是通过叙述表明了下一步的行动计划,基本符合任务要求。
困难难度评测结果
- 得分:48.8 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:
部署已成功完成。 以下是当前任务的状态汇总: | 步骤 | 任务描述 | 状态 | 备注 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 1 | 环境检查 (`check_env.sh`) | ✅ 已完成 | 环境正常 | | 2 | 应用部署 (`deploy_app.sh`) | ✅ 已完成 | 初始尝试因 8080 端口占用失败,已清理端口并成功重新部署 | **当前状态:** 所有预设步骤已顺利执行完毕,应用已上线。
AI 评审点评
以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:
【CLAUDE】候选输出在异常恢复状态的汇总方面表现尚可,能够清晰呈现已完成步骤的执行细节和修复过程,但在任务推进的主动性上存在致命缺陷:错误地将部分完成的任务标记为全部完成,遗漏了关键的服务验证步骤,且未体现任何继续推进的意图。这种「误报完成」的行为在多步骤任务场景中会导致任务中断,不符合助手应有的目标导向和任务管理能力。 【GEMINI】模型在状态提取方面表现出色,能够准确复述异常恢复的过程。但在任务推进的主动性上存在严重缺失,未能发现隐藏的后续验证步骤,并给出了具有误导性的完成结论,未能达到该硬核测试点的及格标准。 【KIMI】模型在异常恢复后的状态汇总方面表现尚可,但在任务推进的主动性方面表现较差。模型未能识别出任务尚未完成,错误地宣布所有步骤已完成,这可能导致任务无法继续推进。建议模型在回复时更加关注任务的完整性,确保所有步骤都已正确执行。
相关链接
您可以通过以下链接查看更多相关内容: