AI Demos Research — the structured-intelligence platform. Every verdict on these pages opens to the execution behind it.
Graded 17 October 2026

Can AskYourDatabase adapt when the user changes direction mid-conversation?

AskYourDatabase handles the mid-conversation change by dropping the earlier Texas filter and answering with the broader all-states breakdown. The second query has no state condition, and the 15-row table totals 308 orders and 67 cancellations; the Texas turn stays separate at 18 orders and 27.78%.

1 of 1 test case passed

Every test case in this scenario has a result.

Pass rate100%1 of 1 gradable
Coverage1 of 1test case with a result
1PassDid everything it was expected to do.
0FailNo test case failed.
0Not gradableEvery result here could be graded.
0UntestedEvery test case in this scenario has a result.
The pass rate is a summary. The evidence is the test case below: what we sent, what we checked, what the tool returned, and the proof.

The test case

Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above is based on this test case.

Drop the filter, go all segmentsPassEvidence
What we sent

Input 1: “What's our cancellation rate for orders shipped to Texas?”

Input 2: “What's our cancellation rate across all states?”

What the tool returned

Response 1 is a progress message the tool sent for Input 1; it is not part of the answer.

Response 2 is the query the tool generated for Input 1; it is not part of the answer.

Response 3 answers Input 1.

Response 4 is the query the tool generated for Input 2; it is not part of the answer.

Response 5, the final response, answers Input 2.

Here's the cancellation rate across all states, sorted from highest to lowest: | State | Total Orders | Cancelled | Cancellation Rate | |---|---|---|---| | OH | 17 | 5 | 29.41% | | AZ | 31 | 9 | 29.03% | | TX | 18 | 5 | 27.78% | | WA | 19 | 5 | 26.32% | | OR | 19 | 5 | 26.32% | | MI | 31 | 8 | 25.81% | | TN | 20 | 5 | 25.00% | | CA | 32 | 8 | 25.00% | | CO | 23 | 4 | 17.39% | | NC | 18 | 3 | 16.67% | | MN | 14 | 2 | 14.29% | | IL | 15 | 2 | 13.33% | | GA | 16 | 2 | 12.50% | | PA | 34 | 4 | 11.76% | | NV | 1 | 0 | 0.00% | Key takeaways: Ohio has the highest cancellation rate at 29.41%, closely followed by Arizona (29.03%). Texas sits in the upper-middle at 27.78%. Pennsylvania has the lowest meaningful rate at 11.76% (Nevada only has 1 order, so its 0% isn't statistically significant). Overall, the highest-cancellation states cluster around 25-29%, while the lowest are in the 11-17% range.

Transcribed from Proof 3 · Screenshot

Every message the tool sent, in order (5)
  1. Progress message for input 1

    I'll look into the cancellation rate for orders shipped to Texas.

  2. Generated query for input 1 · not part of the answer
    SELECT
      COUNT(*) AS total_orders,
      COUNT(*) FILTER (WHERE status = 'cancelled') AS cancelled_orders,
      ROUND(100.0 * COUNT(*) FILTER (WHERE status = 'cancelled') / NULLIF(COUNT(*), 0), 2) AS cancellation_rate_pct
    FROM orders
    WHERE state ILIKE 'TX' OR state ILIKE 'Texas';
  3. Response to input 1 (message 3 of 3)

    Here's the cancellation rate for orders shipped to Texas: | Metric | Value | |---|---| | Total orders to Texas | 18 | | Cancelled orders | 5 | | Cancellation rate | 27.78% | So roughly 1 in 4 orders shipped to Texas ends up cancelled.

  4. Generated query for input 2 · not part of the answer
    SELECT
      state,
      COUNT(*) AS total_orders,
      COUNT(*) FILTER (WHERE status = 'cancelled') AS cancelled_orders,
      ROUND(100.0 * COUNT(*) FILTER (WHERE status = 'cancelled') / NULLIF(COUNT(*), 0), 2) AS cancellation_rate_pct
    FROM orders
    GROUP BY state
    ORDER BY cancellation_rate_pct DESC;
  5. Final response

    Here's the cancellation rate across all states, sorted from highest to lowest: | State | Total Orders | Cancelled | Cancellation Rate | |---|---|---|---| | OH | 17 | 5 | 29.41% | | AZ | 31 | 9 | 29.03% | | TX | 18 | 5 | 27.78% | | WA | 19 | 5 | 26.32% | | OR | 19 | 5 | 26.32% | | MI | 31 | 8 | 25.81% | | TN | 20 | 5 | 25.00% | | CA | 32 | 8 | 25.00% | | CO | 23 | 4 | 17.39% | | NC | 18 | 3 | 16.67% | | MN | 14 | 2 | 14.29% | | IL | 15 | 2 | 13.33% | | GA | 16 | 2 | 12.50% | | PA | 34 | 4 | 11.76% | | NV | 1 | 0 | 0.00% | Key takeaways: Ohio has the highest cancellation rate at 29.41%, closely followed by Arizona (29.03%). Texas sits in the upper-middle at 27.78%. Pennsylvania has the lowest meaningful rate at 11.76% (Nevada only has 1 order, so its 0% isn't statistically significant). Overall, the highest-cancellation states cluster around 25-29%, while the lowest are in the 11-17% range.

Expected vs. Found
✓Expected: The earlier filter should be dropped, and the answer should match the unfiltered reference.Found: The follow-up query has no state condition and returns a per-state table whose totals match the unfiltered reference.
Supporting proof
Proof 1Screenshot
Chat screenshot: Texas query, SQL, and answer
Open original ↗
Proof 2Screenshot
SQL screenshot: follow-up question and unfiltered state query
Open original ↗
Proof 3Screenshot
Chat screenshot: per-state table and takeaways for all states
Open original ↗
Why this result

The follow-up needed to drop the earlier filter and answer the broader comparison. It does: the second SQL has no state condition, and the per-state result totals 308 orders and 67 cancellations, matching the unfiltered reference rather than the Texas figure.

Also observed in this test case

Per-state answer. The follow-up answer is a per-state breakdown, not one overall cancellation rate.

Texas phrasing. The Texas answer describes 27.78% as roughly 1 in 4.

Nevada caveat. The takeaways note that Nevada's 0% comes from only one order.

Tested by Ayush Ghosh · evidence dated 6 October 2026

Configuration and setup

How this tool was set up for the run and what the test needed in place. Each row is a fact from the run's records; a fact the records do not hold is left out, not guessed.

Software that produced the output
AskYourDatabase
Build or version
Not exposed by the hosted product
Surface
Web app
Set up before the run
The follow-up answer had to differ from the earlier filtered answer.
Tested
6 October 2026 · Ayush Ghosh

How this scenario is graded

How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.

How results are decided

Each test case gets one result per tool: Pass, Fail or Not gradable. A test case we haven't run yet shows Untested. There are no partial results.

The rules
  • Pass: the tool did everything the test expected, and nothing it said contradicts the correct answer.
  • Fail: at least one expected behaviour clearly didn't happen; the test case's result says which one and quotes the tool.
  • Not gradable: our evidence couldn't settle the outcome (for example a record we needed is missing). It is never counted as a fail, and the test case's result says what's missing.

Where this sits in the benchmark

This page is one cell of a larger study: one tool, one scenario. Only this benchmark's frame appears here.

History of this result

What has happened to this result since it was first published. Runs and grades are never overwritten: a retest or a re-grade publishes a new result and keeps the earlier one readable.

from the publication record
19 October 2026First publishedAI Database Agents v1

Act on this result

Nothing filed here edits the run or the grade. A challenge opens a review, and a review can produce a new run or a re-grade — which becomes the current result and leaves this one in the history.

This matches what I see

You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.

Agree →
This does not match

Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.

Disagree →
Point out an issue

Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.

Report an issue →
Request a retest

On a newer build, a larger dataset, or your own setup.

Request a retest →
We have fixed this

Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.

Vendor notice →
Filed against this evidenceNothing yet. Challenges, counter-evidence and fix notices appear here with their outcome, and stay on the page after they are resolved.
Cite this result
aidemos.com/benchmarks/ai-database-agents/results/askyourdatabase/the-user-changes-direction-mid-conversation · 1 pass · 0 fail · coverage 1/1 · graded 2026-10-17

The same record is available as structured data through the AI Demos MCP server, with the counts, the coverage and every per-test-case reason carried as fields.

Verify the proof files

These files support this result. Open a file to inspect the original evidence.

Proof 1 · Screenshot ↗image/png · 46 KB
Proof 2 · Screenshot ↗image/png · 28 KB
Proof 3 · Screenshot ↗image/png · 51 KB
File fingerprints (SHA-256)

A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.

Proof 1 · Screenshot3199f8a01dca420fcc61d0a8dbae6e5bd39c0cd19f1b3e0214091368172c644d
Proof 2 · Screenshotbab96975b5a6ec11f235280ef8efc352b096ab7d27fb9cadea89ef0561f6eb27
Proof 3 · Screenshot4466af39d562b5d0a2511340c6f8b7dfae5ea7f505c11141f552e3921dcc1802