Does Basedash preserve a report’s meaning when data changes?
Basedash preserved the requested period when the saved report was refreshed after data changed. The order count rose from 23 to 26, the new reference count.
1 of 1 test case passed
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.
Saved report re-run after new rowsPassEvidence
Input 1 · Order count request: “Show me the number of orders placed in the last 30 days, as of September 2, 2026.”
Input 2 · Chart request: “Show this as a chart.”
Response 1 answers Input 1.
Response 2 (Chart card after re-query) is a result the tool showed for Input 2, not a chat message.
Response 3, the final response, answers Input 2.
26 Orders placed in 30 days 23 orders were placed from August 4 through September 2, 2026, inclusive. The count includes cancelled orders and uses Asia/Calcutta time.
Transcribed from Proof 1 · Screenshot
Everything the tool returned, in order (3)
- Order count answer
23 orders were placed in the 30 days ending September 2, 2026—August 4 through September 2, inclusive. This includes cancelled orders and uses Asia/Calcutta time.
- Chart card after re-query
26 Orders placed in 30 days
- Text beneath the chart
23 orders were placed from August 4 through September 2, 2026, inclusive. The count includes cancelled orders and uses Asia/Calcutta time.
| ✓ | Expected: The refreshed report should reflect the new data while preserving the meaning of the relative period.Found: The saved chart showed 23 orders before refresh and 26 after; the reference counts were 23 and 26 respectively. |
The refreshed report needed to reflect new orders without changing the period. The saved chart changed from 23 to 26, the new reference count, with its title unchanged. The refresh sequence was visible from start to finish.
Chat chart and text diverged. When the conversation was reopened after three orders were added, the chart card re-queried and showed 26; the original text beneath it still showed 23.
Dashboard refresh was manual. The saved dashboard chart retained its value on opening and re-queried when its refresh option was used.
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 | Reporting → | |
| Scenario | The report is run again after the data has changed → | |
| Tool | Basedash → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · Basedash 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.