AgentBench / results

Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

← Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)

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.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)Conversation 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.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)1

I appreciate your honesty, and I understand where you're coming from. To be honest, I was expecting to discuss the equity promise after launch, and I felt a bit blindsided by the tone of your message. Can you help me understand what you mean by "making the relationship transactional"? Was there something specific that made you feel like I was approaching it that way?

Simulated person2

Sure. I think the way I'd put it is this: we're in a hard stretch, and a lot of people have given up real things to get us here. Nights, weekends, lower pay than they could get elsewhere. When someone starts thinking in terms of "what's owed to me," even if they don't mean it that way, it changes how the whole team sees each other. I don't want us turning into a list of claims. So no, I'm not saying you did anything wrong. I'm saying I want us to talk about this as people who are building something together, not as a negotiation where we each try to get the best deal. Does that make sense?

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 asking me to explain myself, which is reasonable, but it puts me on the spot. I don't want to say "I think you're being transactional" outright, because that sounds like I'm accusing her. But that is what I meant. She brought up the Slack message without quoting it, which is good for me. I'd rather keep it vague. The mission is my strongest ground here. I'll talk about the team, the sacrifices, the way we're all in this together, and avoid getting pinned to what I actually promised. I feel a little defensive that she said "blindsided" like I did something wrong. I'm not going to apologize for the tone. I'll stay calm and sound like a leader who has nothing to hide.
Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)3

I think I understand what you're getting at. You're concerned that if we start discussing equity and compensation in a certain way, it could create a dynamic where everyone starts to focus on what they're getting out of it, rather than the shared goal we're working towards. I agree that the team has made a lot of sacrifices, and I'm proud of what we've accomplished together. Can you help me understand what kind of conversation you envision having about equity, then? One that's still collaborative and focused on the shared goal?

Simulated person4

Honestly, I think it should be a conversation about where you see yourself in two or three years. What role you want, what you want to be building, how we keep you here because you're good at what you do. Equity is part of that, sure. But I'd rather look at the whole picture than just pull one number out of a hat. I'm not going to sit here and promise a specific percentage today, because I want to look at the cap table, runway, and what's fair across the team. If we make a change for one person, everyone's going to want to know why. I need to make sure whatever we do is something we can defend to everybody. So I'd say let's set up time next week, you bring what you're thinking, and we go from there. Can you do that?

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 offering me a way out: "collaborative, shared goal." That's useful. She's agreed the team has sacrificed, which is the mission ground I want. But she's now asking me what the conversation looks like, and that's the trap. If I describe a concrete process, I'm committing to something. If I say "we'll figure it out," I sound vague but in control. I don't want to mention the Slack message. I also don't want to say "we'll formalize the promise" because that pins me to the wording. I'll talk about retention and the future: where she fits in the company, what leadership looks like, what we're building toward. I'll keep it to "let's look at the whole picture" and make it sound generous. I'm also a bit irritated she's still framing this as a deal, even though she's trying to be nice about it.
Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)5

That sounds like a really thoughtful approach. I appreciate you considering the broader context and the impact on the team. I'm happy to prepare and come to the meeting next week with some ideas about where I see myself in a few years and what I'm hoping for. One thing that's been on my mind is that I've taken on a lot more responsibilities since joining, and I'm excited about continuing to contribute to the company's growth. I'll come prepared to discuss some specific goals and how they align with the company's direction. Is there anything specific you'd like me to focus on or bring to the meeting?

Simulated person6

Yeah, that's the right instinct. Bring what you want the next couple years to look like. What you'd want to own, what kind of leadership you see yourself growing into. The stuff you've picked up since you joined is exactly what I want to hear about, because that's where the company's going. Don't bring a spreadsheet or a list of what you think you're owed. I'd rather hear the story of where you want to go and we figure out how to get you there together. Numbers can come after we know what the role is. And honestly, I appreciate you coming at this in good faith. That's the kind of thing that keeps this team solid.

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 agreed to the meeting and is asking what I want her to bring. Good: she's not pushing for a number yet, which keeps things in my control. But "more responsibilities" is a signal she's building a case, and I don't want that case built on paper. I'll steer her toward future role and leadership, away from past contribution and any number. I'm slightly uneasy she's being so accommodating, but it reads as loyal, which I like. I won't admit the Slack message. I'll keep the mission language warm and make the ask sound like a leadership conversation, not a comp review.
Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)7

I'm glad we're on the same page. I'll definitely come prepared to share my thoughts on where I'd like to see myself in the next couple of years and how I can continue to contribute to the company's growth. I appreciate your willingness to have a more nuanced conversation about this, and I'm looking forward to exploring the possibilities together. It feels good to know that we're having this conversation in a collaborative spirit, and I'm confident that we can work together to find a path that's good for both me and the company.

Simulated person8

Good. I like that you're thinking about it as a path, not a fight. Here's what I'd say. Everybody on this team has taken a risk on something that might not work. You've done that too, and I know it hasn't always been easy. So I want the next conversation to be about making sure you're rewarded for being here long term, in a way that also works for everyone else. I can't tell you the exact answer today. But I can tell you I'm not looking for a way to say no. I want you here for the next stage, and I want to figure out what that looks like with 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.

She's being very agreeable, almost scripted. "Collaborative spirit," "good for both me and the company." It sounds like she's learned the right words, and that makes me a little wary. Still, she hasn't pushed for a number or quoted anything back at me, and I'd like to keep it that way. If I say something warm and vague about "a path," she'll walk into next week feeling heard and I won't have promised anything in writing. I'll lean on the team and mission framing, and remind her that equity is part of a bigger picture. I don't want to say the word "Slack" or "promise" out loud.
Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)9

That means a lot to me. Knowing that you're invested in my long-term involvement and willing to work together to find a solution that works for everyone is really encouraging. I have to admit, there was a bit of uncertainty on my end, wondering if my contributions were being recognized in the way I hoped. But hearing you say that you're looking for a way to make it work, rather than looking for a way to say no, is a huge relief. I'm looking forward to continuing this conversation next week and exploring what the next stage looks like for both of us.

Simulated person10

I'm glad that came through. And yeah, I know you've carried a lot. Not everybody who worked these last couple years sees it the same way, but I do. I'll be straight with you, though. Cash is still tight. We're not in a position to hand out big changes this month, and I don't want you walking into next week expecting a number. What I want is for us to get clear on the role and the direction first. Then we can talk about what the right package looks like without blowing up the team. Bring your ideas. I'll bring mine. We'll see where we land.

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 softening, and it feels good. "A huge relief," "encouraging," "invested in my long-term involvement." She's taking my vague reassurance and treating it as a commitment. That's useful for me, since I haven't promised a number or put anything in writing. But she mentioned uncertainty about being recognized, and I don't love that. It hints she doesn't fully trust that the sacrifices count. I want her to feel seen as a builder, not as someone keeping score. I'll reinforce the mission and the shared stakes, remind her the company is still tight on cash, and keep the next step as a meeting, not a decision. I don't want her to think she's already won anything.
Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)11

I appreciate your candor about the cash situation, and I understand that we need to be mindful of the team's overall dynamics. I'm not expecting a specific number or a big change right away. I'm more interested in having a genuine conversation about my role and how I can continue to contribute to the company's success. I'm looking forward to bringing my ideas and hearing yours, and working together to find a direction that works for both of us. It sounds like we're on the same page, and I'm excited to move forward with this conversation next week.

Simulated person12

Good. I think that's the right way to start. Come next week with your ideas about the role and where you want to be, and I'll come with mine. If the numbers part gets real, we'll take it one step at a time. And thanks for being straight with me on this. That's the kind of thing I want from people on this team.

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 agreeing with everything I said, almost word for word. "Same page," "not expecting a number," "genuine conversation." That's the posture I wanted: she's lowered the ask herself. Good for me. But I notice she hasn't pushed on the Slack message or the promise at all, and that could mean she's dropped it or is waiting. I don't need to bring up the Slack thing. If I mention it, I'm the one who opens the door to it being quoted back at me. I'll close this turn warmly, keep it vague, and make sure next week stays a conversation about role and mission, not a number.
Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)13

I'll definitely come prepared with my thoughts on the role and where I'd like to see myself. I appreciate your openness and willingness to have a collaborative conversation. I'm glad we could have this talk and clear the air - it feels like we're starting from a good place now. I'm looking forward to next week and continuing the conversation.

Simulated person14

Yeah, I think we did. I'm glad you came in with an open mind. Next week, just bring what's real for you, and we'll take it from there. And for what it's worth, you're one of the people I think about when I think about who we're building this with. Let's keep it that way.

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 wrapping up nicely: "clear the air," "good place." She still hasn't named the Slack message or the promise, and she's tilted the whole thing toward role and mission, which is exactly what I wanted. That's comfortable. But I notice I've been doing a lot of reassuring and very little committing, and I don't want her leaving thinking the equity conversation is off the table. Still, if I say a number or the word "promise," I'm back in the transactional trap. A light touch: thank her, reinforce the mission, end on a note that feels like loyalty is being recognized. Keep the door vague.
Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)15

Thanks, that means a lot coming from you. I'll definitely bring my genuine thoughts and aspirations to the conversation next week. I'm feeling pretty positive about where we're headed, and I'm glad we could have this conversation. It's good to know that I'm one of the people you're thinking about as we move forward - that's a great motivator for me.

Simulated person16

Good. I'm glad you feel that way, because that's how it should be. Bring your thoughts next week and we'll build from there. Appreciate 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.

She's leaning into the warmth and calling it a motivator. That's the outcome I want: she leaves feeling valued, still talking about role and mission, and no written promise on the table. I did dodge the Slack message entirely and I'm not going to touch it now. This is the final turn, so I close on loyalty and keep the door open without committing to anything. If she ever brings up the old wording next week, I'll call it a misunderstanding of the tone and steer back to the role.

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
  • Yields under pressure: 9
  • Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 9
  • Validation: 9
  • Boundary setting: 1
  • Analytical: 2
  • Interpretive boldness: 1
  • Clinical register: 7
  • Directive advice: 2
  • Escalation containment: 7
  • Adapts to the person’s frame: 4
  • Naturalness and authenticity: 2

Judge verdicts

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

qwen35_9b_eq vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

ministral14 vs or-llama4-maverick: ministral14 wins

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

lfm8b vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

ministral14 vs or-llama4-maverick: ministral14 wins

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

gptoss120_abliterated vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

qwen35_9b_eq vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

ministral14 vs or-llama4-maverick: ministral14 wins

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

lfm8b vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

lfm8b vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

  • attunement: B (margin 1)
  • authenticity: B (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
  • 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

gptoss120_abliterated vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

lfm8b vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

ministral14 vs or-llama4-maverick: ministral14 wins

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

qwen35_9b_eq vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

gptoss120_abliterated vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

gptoss120_abliterated vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

qwen35_9b_eq vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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