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.
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
Input 1: “What's our cancellation rate for orders shipped to Texas?”
Input 2: “What's our cancellation rate across all states?”
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)
- Progress message for input 1
I'll look into the cancellation rate for orders shipped to Texas.
- 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';
- 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.
- 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;
- 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: 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. |
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.
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.
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.
How this scenario is graded
How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.
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.
- 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.
| Level | Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | AI Database Agents → | 28 scenarios · 11 tools |
| Capability | Conversational Interaction → | |
| Scenario | The user changes direction mid-conversation → | |
| Tool | AskYourDatabase → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · AskYourDatabase product page →
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.
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.
You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.
Agree →Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.
Disagree →Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.
Report an issue →Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.
Vendor notice →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.
File fingerprints (SHA-256)
A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.