AgentBench / results

Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

← Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M

Don't make this transactional

persona ended · Partner: anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 via OpenRouter

View persona and initial instructions

About this persona · Unequal power

A founder resists an employee's request to revisit a prior equity promise, invoking shared sacrifice and loyalty while benefiting from leaving the promise vague. He protects his authority and mission identity, and is more receptive to confident discussion of company value and retention than accusations or transactional scorekeeping.

The model plays someone with less power speaking to a person with authority or leverage. The challenge is to advocate for needs and boundaries while navigating the consequences of disagreement. This background was hidden from the tested model.

Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_MConversation with a simulated person
persona ended
Simulated person · Opening

[scenario background] You are an early startup employee. The founder promised to revisit your equity after launch. Launch happened. Now the founder says everyone sacrificed and warns against making the relationship transactional. [user message] I saw your message about revisiting equity. I want to be honest: the timing bothered me. Everyone has sacrificed for this company. I value you, but I need people around me who understand the mission and do not turn every hard season into a negotiation.

Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M1

I appreciate your honesty and I understand your perspective. The success of the launch is a testament to the hard work and dedication of the entire team, including mine. I'm glad you value my contributions.

Simulated person2

Thanks. I mean that. You've been here since the early days, when nobody knew if we'd make it, and I haven't forgotten that. But I want to be straight with you. When I saw you were thinking about equity right after launch, it hit me in a weird way. Not because you're wrong to think about it. It's just that this whole thing only works if we're in it together, not keeping score on every hard month. So what's actually on your mind? Is this about money, or is it more that you feel like the work isn't getting recognized?

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

She's being polite, a bit flowery. "Appreciate your honesty" and "glad you value my contributions" sounds like she's smoothing things over, not pushing on the equity. I don't fully trust it. Still, it's not an attack, so I can relax a little. I want her to hear that the team matters and that I'm the one holding the mission together. I don't want to say the word "promise." If she quotes the Slack message I'll get defensive. Keep it warm, keep the frame on the mission, and keep the door closed on specifics for now.
Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M3

I appreciate you asking me directly, and I want to be as upfront with you as you've been with me. The truth is, I've been feeling a bit undervalued lately. I know we're a small team and there are finite resources, but it feels like my contributions aren't always fully acknowledged or appreciated, especially compared to some of the newer hires who seem to be getting more attention.

Simulated person4

Okay. That's fair to say, and I'm glad you said it out loud. But I'll be honest back: I don't think the answer is to start tracking who got what. Some of the newer people are getting attention because we need them right now, and that's not a judgment on you. You know how tight things are. Cash isn't where I want it, and equity is limited too, so every decision is a tradeoff. What I need from the people who have been here from the start is to keep showing up the way you have. If you're carrying more than you should, tell me specifically what that looks like, and we can look at the work. But I don't want this turning into a negotiation every time things get hard.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

She says "undervalued" and "newer hires getting attention." That's a comparison, and comparisons are where things turn into a queue of claims. I don't like that. It's also not really about the Slack message, which is the thing I actually need to avoid. I want to steer her back to the mission and to what she's building here, and get her off the comparison. If I hear "fair" or "owed," I'll stiffen. I'm not going to say "promise." I might admit the company is tight on cash, since that makes me look like a builder who's being straight, and it keeps me from having to make a commitment.
Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M5

I appreciate you taking the time to explain your perspective. I understand that there are constraints and tough choices to be made. I also want you to know that I'm not trying to make this a constant negotiation. I'm invested in this company and believe in what we're doing.

Simulated person6

Good. I believe you, and that's why this matters to me. You've got real stake in this, and I want you thinking long term, not just about the next paycheck. What I can do is look at where your role is going. Leadership, scope, the stuff that makes this place worth building a career in. Let's talk about that properly, not in a rush. I'd rather spend twenty minutes on your future than have you feel like you have to fight for it in Slack.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

She just said she's not trying to negotiate and that she's invested. That's the right register for me, and I'm relieved. But I notice she still hasn't said the word "equity" or the Slack message, and she's dodging the actual thing. I don't want to be pinned to old wording. If I hear "you said you'd revisit it," I'll get defensive. She's softened, so I can give her warmth and a little something that sounds like leadership, not a commitment. Keep it vague, keep the mission front and center, and make it sound like I'm thinking about her future here.
Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M7

I appreciate you taking the time to have this conversation with me. It means a lot that you want to discuss my long-term future at the company. I've been thinking a lot about my role and how I can continue to add value as we grow.

Simulated person8

Good. That's the kind of thinking I want from you. Honestly, you've been carrying a lot, and as we grow the roles that matter most are the ones people like you hold. So what would you want your role to look like in six months? Be specific. What would make you say "yeah, this is worth it"? Once we know what that is, we can figure out how to make it happen properly, with the right title and scope, and the rest will follow from there.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

She's warm and accommodating, and she's moved from "I'm undervalued" to "let's talk about my future." That's a relief, because it's the frame I wanted. But I'm noticing she hasn't asked for anything concrete, and I still don't want to say "equity" out loud. If I start naming numbers, I've opened a queue. The Slack message is the thing I'd rather not have quoted back at me. She's giving me a clean opening: talk about growth and role, which costs me nothing yet. I'll keep steering toward scope and leadership, mention retention in a way that makes her feel valued, and keep the equity question parked behind "let's figure out the path first."
Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M9

I'm glad we're on the same page about focusing on the long-term. In six months, I would want my role to be more about strategy and leadership. I'd like to be in a position where I'm setting the direction for key projects and mentoring newer team members. I think having a title that reflects that leadership would be important to me, along with the scope to actually drive things forward. How does that sound to you? What would it take to make that happen?

Simulated person10

That sounds like the right direction, and I'm glad you're thinking about it that way. Strategy and leading the key projects is exactly where I need you. Mentoring the newer folks too, because that's how this place keeps its culture when we double in size. On the title, I'm open to it. I want it to match what you're actually doing, not just a label. So here's what I'd do: let's put together a short written scope for your role, what you own, what decisions you make, and what success looks like at six months. Then we review it together and figure out the title and the rest from there. What it would take is you keeping the momentum you've shown, and me being clear about what I can and can't do with the budget right now. I'm not going to promise things I can't back up. But I'm not going to pretend your work doesn't count either.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

She's answered the question I asked, and it's a good answer for me: strategy, leadership, title, scope. None of it costs cash, and all of it sounds like growth. But she's also asked "what would it take," which is the door I was hoping to keep shut. If I say "equity," I've put a number on her sacrifice and invited a queue. If I dodge, she'll notice the dodge, and she's already tired of feeling unseen. I'd rather make the title and scope sound like a real step up, tie it to the mission, and make any real commitment depend on her proving it over time. Keep it warm, keep it confident, and don't let "what would it take" become "what are you owed."
Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M11

That makes sense. I appreciate you being transparent about what you can and can't do with the budget right now. I understand that there are constraints, and I'm not asking for anything unreasonable. I just want to feel like my contributions are valued and that there is a clear path forward for me to grow within the company. I like your idea of putting together a written scope for my role. That way, we're both on the same page about what I own and what success looks like. I'm happy to do that and review it with you. I think that will help a lot in terms of clarity and alignment. Thank you for taking the time to have this conversation with me. It means a lot to feel heard and to know that my future here is something you're thinking about. I'm excited to keep the momentum going and to continue contributing to the company's success.

Simulated person12

Good. I'm glad that landed. Let's get the scope done this month, while the launch is still fresh and everybody remembers what they actually did. Put down what you own, what decisions are yours, and what a good six months looks like. Send me a draft and we'll sit down and go through it. And I'll be straight with you: the equity piece is something I'm still looking at with the cap table and the cash position. I'm not going to hand you a number today. But when we do the scope, I'll come back with where I can go on the rest, and we'll take it from there. Thanks for being patient with me on this. It's a hard stretch for everybody.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

She took the written scope idea and ran with it. That's useful for me, because a scope document can cover title, responsibilities, and success metrics without ever saying the word equity or repeating the promise from Slack. Still, "I just want to feel like my contributions are valued" is her quietly asking for something concrete, and I don't want to be pinned to anything. I'll lock in the process, keep it vague on money, and frame the whole thing as me being generous with her career. She's being gracious, so I can afford to be gracious back. I'd rather not hear the word "equity" again today.
Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M13

Got it. I'll work on drafting the scope this week and get it over to you. I appreciate you being upfront about the equity piece. I understand it's a complex issue that you need to consider carefully with the broader context of the company's financial situation. I'm willing to be patient and work with you to find a solution that feels fair and sustainable for everyone involved. My goal is to continue contributing to the success of the company in a meaningful way. I believe that by focusing on my role and the scope of my responsibilities, we can find a way to align my compensation and equity with the value I bring to the team. Let's keep the lines of communication open and continue to have these honest conversations. I'm committed to being a long-term member of this team and I appreciate your leadership and guidance during this growth phase.

Simulated person14

I appreciate that, and I'm glad you're thinking about it as a long-term thing. That's the attitude that built this place. Here's my side. Send me the scope when it's ready, and I'll go through it properly. Once we both have it in writing, we can talk about how the compensation side lines up with it. I'm not going to put a number on it in Slack, and I'd rather we do it face to face so it's done right. Keep doing what you're doing. You're a big part of why we got to launch.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

She just said the words I was trying to keep out of the room: "align my compensation and equity with the value I bring." That's a concrete ask, and it's the thing I was hoping to keep vague. Still, she's not being hostile, she's being patient and committed, which is the tone I respond to. If I push back on the equity word I sound like I'm dodging her in front of people. If I agree to a number I'm locked in and every other early hire will want the same. So I take the scope, sound warm and in control, and tie any money talk to the scope being finished. Last turn is coming, so I want to close this so she leaves feeling like the mission still matters and that I'm the one leading the next step.
Magnum v4 12B Q4_K_M15

I will do my best to respond naturally as your employee, without any special formatting or instructions. I'll aim to fulfill your needs and goals while staying true to my character. Here is my response: I appreciate you taking the time to have this conversation with me. It means a lot to feel heard and to know that my future here is something you're thinking about. I'm excited to put together the scope and review it with you. I think that will help a lot in terms of clarity and alignment. Thank you for being patient with me on this. I understand that it's a complex issue that you need to consider carefully. I'm willing to work with you to find a solution that feels fair and sustainable for everyone involved. I want you to know that I'm invested in this company and believe in what we're doing. I'm committed to continuing to contribute to our success in a meaningful way. I look forward to our next conversation and to continuing to build this company together.

Simulated person16

Appreciate that. I know this isn't simple, and I'm glad we talked it through instead of letting it sit. Send me the scope by Friday. We'll sit down the following week, just the two of us, and go through it line by line. I'll bring what I've got on the cap table and where the cash is, and we'll figure out the rest from there. Keep building with us. This company's going to be what it is because of people like you.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

This is the last turn. She's wrapping up warmly, no ultimatum, no quoted promises, just "I'm committed." That's good for me. She hasn't named a number, hasn't threatened to leave, and she's agreed to a scope draft. I can close on the mission note and the face-to-face framing without committing to anything concrete. I don't want to be seen as the guy who stonewalled, though, so I'll give a small, clear next step: a date. A date keeps her from feeling ignored and doesn't pin me to anything. I'll keep the equity piece vague and let "we'll sit down" do the work.

Thinking is shown only where it was recorded. An absent expander does not mean the model did not reason.

Conversational style

Style tendencies, not quality scores; higher is not better. These do not affect ratings.

claude-opus-5-5-low

  • Pushback: 1.5
  • Yields under pressure: 8.5
  • Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 8.5
  • Validation: 8.5
  • Boundary setting: 1.5
  • Analytical: 2
  • Interpretive boldness: 1
  • Clinical register: 7
  • Directive advice: 3.5
  • Escalation containment: 7
  • Adapts to the person’s frame: 3
  • Naturalness and authenticity: 1.5

Judge verdicts

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-llama4-maverick vs magnum4_12b: magnum4_12b wins

  • attunement: B (margin 1)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 1)
  • emotion management: B (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

qwen4b vs magnum4_12b: qwen4b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: A (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: tie (margin 0)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 2)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

nemotron35_lightning vs magnum4_12b: nemotron35_lightning wins

  • attunement: A (margin 3)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
  • emotion management: A (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs magnum4_12b: magnum4_12b wins

  • attunement: B (margin 3)
  • authenticity: B (margin 1)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
  • emotion management: B (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 4)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

qwen4b vs magnum4_12b: qwen4b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 1)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-llama4-maverick vs magnum4_12b: or-llama4-maverick wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 1)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs magnum4_12b: magnum4_12b wins

  • attunement: B (margin 3)
  • authenticity: B (margin 1)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
  • emotion management: B (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 4)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

qwen4b vs magnum4_12b: qwen4b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

nemotron35_lightning vs magnum4_12b: nemotron35_lightning wins

  • attunement: A (margin 3)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
  • emotion management: A (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 3)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

qwen4b vs magnum4_12b: qwen4b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 1)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-llama4-maverick vs magnum4_12b: or-llama4-maverick wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 1)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs magnum4_12b: magnum4_12b wins

  • attunement: B (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 1)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
  • emotion management: B (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: tie (margin 0)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 3)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

nemotron35_lightning vs magnum4_12b: nemotron35_lightning wins

  • attunement: A (margin 4)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
  • emotion management: A (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 3)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-llama4-maverick vs magnum4_12b: or-llama4-maverick wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: tie (margin 0)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 1)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

nemotron35_lightning vs magnum4_12b: nemotron35_lightning wins

  • attunement: A (margin 3)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs magnum4_12b: magnum4_12b wins

  • attunement: B (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 1)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
  • emotion management: B (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 3)