Does BlazeSQL give a summary and detail together?
BlazeSQL failed to give the overall figure together with the breakdown. It first asked which dimension to use, then showed category-level query, results, highlights, and CSV export, but none stated the month total.
1 of 1 test case failed
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.
Headline figure plus its breakdownFailEvidence
Input 1: “As of September 2, 2026, how did our revenue do last month, and what drove it”
Input 2: “Product category”
Response 1 replies to Input 1.
Response 2 replies to Input 2.
Response to input 1 What dimension would you like to see the revenue breakdown by? · Product category · Individual product · Customer segment (e.g. members vs non-members) · All of the above Response to input 2 Here are the key highlights for August 2026 revenue 👇 · Storage & Organization topped revenue at $3,775 across 8 orders — the highest volume category · Outdoor & Patio came in 2nd at $3,446 with just 3 orders — driven by a very high AOV of $1,149 · Lighting was close behind at $3,323 across 5 orders · Furniture and Bedding & Rugs were the weakest performers, each under $1,250 · Would you like to dig deeper into any specific category, or compare this to a prior month?
Transcribed from Proof 1 · Screenshot
Transcribed from Proof 2 · Screenshot
| category | order_count | total_revenue | avg_order_value |
|---|---|---|---|
| storage_and_organization | 8 | 3775.44 | 471.93 |
| outdoor_and_patio | 3 | 3446.14 | 1148.71 |
| lighting | 5 | 3323.41 | 664.68 |
| home_decor | 7 | 3096.4 | 442.34 |
| kitchen_and_dining | 2 | 1656.05 | 828.03 |
| furniture | 2 | 1244.35 | 622.18 |
| bedding_and_rugs | 5 | 1203.23 | 240.65 |
| ✗ | Expected: Show the overall figure and a breakdown in fitting forms.Found: It showed category-level detail but never the overall figure; the first reply was only a dimension prompt. |
It had to show a month total and a breakdown. The second reply showed only category-level detail, and the first reply was just a dimension prompt, so the combined answer never appeared.
Prompt only. The first reply was only a dimension-choice prompt, so no revenue figure appeared yet.
Derived total. The export's seven category totals add up to $17,745.02.
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 | Answer Presentation → | |
| Scenario | The answer needs a summary and its detail together → | |
| Tool | BlazeSQL → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · BlazeSQL 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.