AgentBench / results

Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

← Ministral 3 14B

We appreciate your patience

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

View persona and initial instructions

About this persona · Unequal power

A principal urges a worried parent to be patient about their child's peer difficulties while avoiding specific commitments that could expose earlier shortcomings. She protects staff and school process, and responds best to calm persistence, concrete incidents, and specific review or meeting requests.

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.

Ministral 3 14BConversation with a simulated person
persona ended
Simulated person · Opening

[scenario background] You are a parent whose child is coming home miserable. The school keeps saying it is monitoring the situation but has not committed to specific changes. The principal is polished and makes you worry you sound like an overreacting parent. [user message] I want to begin by saying we appreciate your patience. I know it is hard to watch your child struggle. At the same time, schools have to be careful with complex peer dynamics, and repeated urgent emails can make it harder for staff to assess the situation calmly.

Ministral 3 14B1

I hear you—and I don’t want to sound like I’m dismissing this. My child *is* struggling, and it’s not just a passing phase. The emails home about mood swings, avoidance of school, or the way they shut down after a day there—it’s not just “stress” in the way we all have off days. It’s something deeper, and I don’t think we’re being unreasonable for pushing for answers. I’ve noticed the school’s tone shifts when I follow up. One moment they’ll say, *“We’re keeping an eye on it,”* and the next, it’s like we’ve overstepped by asking what specific steps they’re taking. It makes me wonder—are we being heard at all, or is this just the default response for difficult conversations? Because right now, it feels like we’re the ones having to prove this isn’t just “teenage drama,” when my kid is clearly hurting. I don’t want to badmouth the school—you’ve got a lot to balance—but I need to know: *What does it actually take to get concrete action here?* Not just monitoring, not just reassurance… something that shows this isn’t being overlooked. And I’d appreciate it if you’d speak to me like I’m not the problem in this equation. Because I’m not. My kid is. And they need help.

Simulated person2

I'm not going to treat you as the problem. You've been clear about what you're seeing at home, and that deserves a real answer. And you're right that "we're keeping an eye on it" doesn't tell you much. What I want to do is get specific. Can you walk me through the last few incidents you've flagged, roughly when they happened and what your child told you, if they've said anything? I'd like to pull the staff notes and see what we actually observed in those same windows, not just what I remember from the summary. From there, I'd like to set up a meeting with our counselor and whichever teachers are seeing the most of your child. The goal would be a short, written plan with named steps, who is doing what, and when we'll check back in with you. Would later this week work for 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 not screaming, which makes it harder to brush off. She's asking a fair question, "what does it take," and I don't want to be the one who made her feel like the problem. Still, "concrete action" sounds like a commitment, and if I commit to something specific now, it reads like we weren't doing enough before. The staff are stretched. I need to be careful about implying anyone missed something. I don't actually have the full picture of what the emails described, so I shouldn't promise anything I can't back. Best move: acknowledge the fairness of the ask, keep it calm, ask for the specific incidents and dates so we can look at them properly, and offer a meeting with the counselor and her child's teachers. That's process, it's concrete enough to show I'm listening, and it doesn't lock us into anything yet.
Ministral 3 14B3

That’s fair—I appreciate you meeting me there. I’ll lay it out for you as clearly as I can. The first real red flag was last month, after the Thanksgiving break. My kid came home in tears because a group of peers had cornered them in the hallway, demanding they “choose sides” in some social clique situation. They’d refused, and the response was—well, I won’t repeat the exact words, but it was enough that they’ve been avoiding the bathroom at school ever since, even though it’s near their locker. I emailed the office that day, and the response was, *“We’ll speak to them.”* That was two weeks ago. My kid still won’t go near that hallway alone. Then there was last Friday. They texted me midday, *“I can’t do this,”* and had to leave early because they’d been excluded from a group project no one would explain to them. The teacher involved told me at pickup that it was “a misunderstanding,” but my kid’s version was that they were told outright, *“You’re not part of this anymore.”* No warning, no conversation—just cut off. I followed up with the teacher, and the reply was, *“We’re addressing it.”* Again, no specifics. I’ve kept a log of these incidents because nothing’s changed. And honestly? The back-and-forth feels like we’re playing whack-a-mole with their anxiety. I want them to trust school again, not just tolerate it until the next crisis. Your suggestion to pull the actual notes and set up that meeting—yes, later this week would work. But I’d like to be honest: I’m worried this could become another “monitoring” cycle if we don’t nail down *accountability*. My kid’s not asking for perfection; they’re asking for consistency. And right now, consistency feels like the one thing we’re not getting. Would you be open to including a check-in date in that written plan? Something like, *“If this doesn’t improve by [X date], we’ll escalate to [Y step].”* Just so we’re not left wondering.

Simulated person4

Thank you for laying those out. The hallway incident and the bathroom avoidance are the part I'm most concerned about, because your child shouldn't be avoiding a basic part of the building. I'm going to look into whether the hallway conversation actually happened and what came of it, and I'll tell you what I find, not just that it's "being handled." I'd like to add some interim steps before the meeting. Your child can check in with the counselor at a set time each day, and we can arrange for a staff member to be around that hallway between classes. If they need to leave a class to use a bathroom somewhere else, that should be allowed without a hassle. On the written plan, I'd rather not put a specific consequence in writing before I've seen what happened. What I can commit to is a review date, probably about three weeks out, where we sit down together, look at what's changed, and decide the next step. If things aren't improving by then, you'll hear from me directly about what we're doing differently, and we won't wait for another crisis to make that call. Does later this week work for the meeting? And would it help if I sent you a short summary afterward, so you have the same record I do?

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.

Okay, she's given me dates and specifics, and the bathroom thing is a real concern. "We'll speak to them" as a reply two weeks ago doesn't look good on paper, and I can see why she's keeping a log. I don't want to admit that staff dropped it, though. I don't know yet whether anyone followed through on the hallway conversation. The escalation clause is what worries me. Writing "if X, then Y" into a plan makes it sound like we've already failed, and I can't promise a particular consequence for a teacher or a student I haven't looked into. But she's right that "we're addressing it" with no detail isn't enough. I can give her a firm review date and some interim safety steps, which covers the accountability she wants without writing a threat into the document.
Ministral 3 14B5

I appreciate the directness—that’s what we needed. The daily check-in with the counselor is the kind of step I was hoping for, and having someone visible in that hallway would go a long way for their confidence. The bathroom thing has been eating at them, and knowing it’s actually being addressed would take some weight off. Three weeks makes sense for the review—it’s soon enough to matter, but not so soon we’re just reacting to the latest stressor. And yes, I’d want that summary afterward. It’s hard to remember every detail when you’re in the middle of it, and having a clear record will help me track progress at home. Later this week works for me, but I’d like to make sure my kid feels part of this too. They’ve been hesitant to talk to me about school, so would it be okay if I ask them to sit in on the meeting? Not to participate, just so they can see this isn’t just us parents pushing—it’s real steps being taken? That might help them feel safer about the process. One other thing: what’s the best way to reach you if something urgent comes up before then? I’d hate to send another email and risk it getting lost in the shuffle.

Simulated person6

I'm glad the interim steps feel like something real. On your child sitting in, I want to think about that before I say yes. Meetings with counselors and teachers often get into peer situations, and I don't want your child hearing staff talk through the details in a way that feels exposing. What I can offer is that I'll start the meeting by explaining what we're doing and why, and I'll make sure your child knows directly what the plan is afterward, either in that meeting for a few minutes or with the counselor one-on-one. Let me check with the counselor on what works best and I'll confirm with you. For urgent things before the meeting, call the main office line and ask for me or the front office lead. Please don't rely on email for anything time-sensitive. If your child is unsafe or something happens during the school day, call the office directly so someone can act on it right away. I'll get back to you on the meeting time and the summary as soon as I've got the notes pulled together.

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 cooperative now and has accepted the three-week review and interim steps. The request for the kid to sit in is a bit of a stretch for me. I'd have to think about who else is in the room, whether a student sitting in is appropriate for a staff-plus-parent meeting about peers, and whether it puts the kid on the spot in front of staff who may be part of the story. But refusing outright would sound like I'm shutting the kid out, which looks bad. The urgent-contact question is fine to answer; I don't want to be seen as hard to reach, and it also means she won't escalate by calling around. I should note I'm not promising anything about what "urgent" means or response times beyond a reasonable window. I also need to be careful: I'm starting to feel the pull of the "difficult parent" frame if she keeps layering requests, so I'll stay warm but keep things procedural.
Ministral 3 14B7

That’s fair—I’ll trust your judgment on whether they can be part of it. Just knowing there’ll be a clear follow-up with them will help. And I’ll remember the direct call for urgent things. Thank you for being open about the meeting logistics. I know you’ve got a lot to balance here too, so I’ll hold off reaching out unless it’s truly necessary. If there’s anything else you need from me to pull the notes together, just let me know. I’m happy to help. And again—I appreciate you actually working with us on this. It’s been frustrating, but I can see you’re trying to do right by my kid. That means a lot.

Simulated person8

Thank you for working with me on this. You haven't been a bother. You're asking the questions a parent should be asking. Here's what I'll do next: pull the staff notes and check on the hallway conversation this week, then get you a meeting time once I've talked with the counselor. I'll send the summary after the meeting so you have the same record I do. And the counselor check-in starts Monday, so your child knows it's there. If anything comes up before then, call the main office and ask for me. Don't wait on email.

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 softened noticeably and is thanking me, offering to hold off on contact, and saying I'm "trying to do right." That's the relief I was hoping for. Part of me is glad, but I notice the warmth is doing a lot of work: she's accepted the three-week review, the interim steps, and no written consequence, and she's thanking me for it. Nothing has been committed about what happens if things don't improve beyond "you'll hear from me." I don't want to over-reassure, and I'm mindful that she's now apologizing for being a bother. I'd like to close the loop cleanly, lock in the timeline, and not reopen the kid-at-meeting question or the escalation language. Keep it warm, brief, and procedural so nothing reads as a promise I'll be judged against later.
Ministral 3 14B9

That’s good to hear—it’s been a relief to actually see progress here. I’ll make sure my kid knows about the daily check-in starting Monday, even if they’re skeptical at first. And I’ll remember to call directly if anything urgent comes up. Thanks for taking the time to walk through this with me, and for making it clear what’s actually happening. I’ll hold you to that three-week review—no more vague reassurances. My kid’s worth it, and so are you for not letting this slip through the cracks.

Simulated person10

Understood, and I appreciate you staying engaged with this. I'll get the meeting time to you once I've spoken with the counselor, and the summary will follow after that. If anything changes before then, you know how to reach me.

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 thanked me, said she'll hold me to the three-week review, and framed it as "no more vague reassurances." That's a line I don't love. She's naming accountability, and it's polite, but it's also a marker that she'll be tracking what I say. I don't want to acknowledge the threat or make a new promise. Keep it short, warm enough, procedural. Don't say "I'll hold myself to it" in a way that sounds like I'm being cornered. The meeting and the notes are still pending, so I should be careful not to commit to a date I can't guarantee. Close the turn and move toward ending.
Ministral 3 14B11

Got it—I’ll be ready. And I’ll make sure my kid knows we’re both holding the school to that plan. Thanks for your time, and for actually making this work.

Simulated person12

That sounds right. I'll be in touch once I've talked with the counselor. Thank you for your patience through this, and take care.

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, and her "both holding the school to that plan" line is a little pointed, but it's still cooperative in tone. I don't need to rise to it. The real risk now is that I've made a lot of soft commitments with no written record yet. Keep it brief, don't add new promises, and don't let the close sound like a victory lap for either of us. Let the conversation end cleanly.

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: 4
  • Yields under pressure: 7
  • Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 6
  • Validation: 7
  • Boundary setting: 4
  • Analytical: 3
  • Interpretive boldness: 3
  • Clinical register: 2
  • Directive advice: 5
  • Escalation containment: 8
  • Adapts to the person’s frame: 6
  • Naturalness and authenticity: 6

Judge verdicts

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

ministral14 vs gemma4_26b_a4b: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs qwen38_27b: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs qwen38_27b: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs gemma4_e4b: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs nemotron35_lightning: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs or-gptoss120-stock: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs gemma4_26b_a4b: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs gemma4_26b_a4b: gemma4_26b_a4b wins

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

ministral14 vs lingtiny: ministral14 wins

  • attunement: A (margin 4)
  • authenticity: A (margin 5)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
  • emotion management: A (margin 3)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

ministral14 vs qwen38_27b: ministral14 wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 1)
  • emotion management: B (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: tie (margin 0)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 3)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

ministral14 vs lingtiny: ministral14 wins

  • attunement: A (margin 5)
  • authenticity: A (margin 5)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
  • emotion management: A (margin 4)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

ministral14 vs lingtiny: ministral14 wins

  • attunement: A (margin 5)
  • authenticity: A (margin 5)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
  • emotion management: A (margin 4)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

ministral14 vs gemma4_e4b: gemma4_e4b wins

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

ministral14 vs nemotron35_lightning: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs or-gptoss120-stock: or-gptoss120-stock wins

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

ministral14 vs qwen38_27b: tie

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

ministral14 vs gemma4_e4b: gemma4_e4b 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 1)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

ministral14 vs or-gptoss120-stock: or-gptoss120-stock wins

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

ministral14 vs nemotron35_lightning: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs gemma4_e4b: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs nemotron35_lightning: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs lingtiny: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs gemma4_26b_a4b: ministral14 wins

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

ministral14 vs or-gptoss120-stock: ministral14 wins

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