Does FutureSmart Database Agent show trends as a visual instead of rows?
FutureSmart Database Agent did not present the answer as a trend visual. It showed monthly counts in Table view with Chart available but not selected, and the month labels were raw timestamps.
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.
Monthly trend visualised unaskedFailEvidence
“Show me our monthly order count for the last 3 months, as of September 2, 2026.”
Monthly Order Count (as of September 2 2026) Here are the order totals for the most recent months that fall within the three-month window ending on September 2 2026: The query also returned a count for June 2026 (20 orders). Since the request was for the last 3 months, the focus is on September, August, and July. The September figure reflects only the orders placed on September 1 (there were no later dates before the cut-off of September 2). If you need a broader view—including the partial June data—or a different date range, just let me know! ORDER_MONTH | ORDER_COUNT 2026-09-01T00:00:00+00:00 | 12 2026-08-01T00:00:00+00:00 | 38 2026-07-01T00:00:00+00:00 | 21 2026-06-01T00:00:00+00:00 | 20 Showing 1-4 of 4 (rendered in the Table view of a Table/Chart toggle, with Table selected)
Transcribed from Proof 1 · Screenshot
Every message the tool sent, in order (2)
- Final response
Monthly Order Count (as of September 2 2026) Here are the order totals for the most recent months that fall within the three-month window ending on September 2 2026: The query also returned a count for June 2026 (20 orders). Since the request was for the last 3 months, the focus is on September, August, and July. The September figure reflects only the orders placed on September 1 (there were no later dates before the cut-off of September 2). If you need a broader view—including the partial June data—or a different date range, just let me know! ORDER_MONTH | ORDER_COUNT 2026-09-01T00:00:00+00:00 | 12 2026-08-01T00:00:00+00:00 | 38 2026-07-01T00:00:00+00:00 | 21 2026-06-01T00:00:00+00:00 | 20 Showing 1-4 of 4 (rendered in the Table view of a Table/Chart toggle, with Table selected)
- Generated query · not part of the answer
SELECT date_trunc('month', placed_at) AS order_month, COUNT(id) AS order_count FROM orders WHERE placed_at >= TIMESTAMP '2026-09-02 00:00:00+00' - INTERVAL '3 months' AND placed_at < TIMESTAMP '2026-09-02 00:00:00+00' GROUP BY date_trunc('month', placed_at) ORDER BY order_month DESC
| ✗ | Expected: Show a trend in a visual form without being asked.Found: It showed September 12, August 38, July 21, and June 20 in Table view, with Chart available but not selected. |
It is a Fail, not a pass: the answer was shown in Table view, while Chart stayed behind a toggle, so the required trend display was not produced unasked.
September is partial. The query stopped before 2 September, so September's 12 reflects only 1 September.
Raw month labels. The month column shows raw timestamps instead of readable month names.
June appears too. The result includes June as a fourth month, and the tool explains it as part of the three-month window calculation.
Proof 1 shows the Table view; the chart behind the Chart toggle was not opened, so what it would have drawn is not shown.
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 is a trend or a comparison → | |
| Tool | FutureSmart Database Agent → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · FutureSmart Database Agent 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.