In your situation, you do the least harm by doing nothing. You want to create the moral quandary that taking action causes arguably less harm, but implies the action-taker now has some responsibility in the result.

That might also explain its contradiction at the end, since it’s probably had more examples of the trolley problem in the reverse of how you’ve described it to train on.

"It is difficult to say for certain whether an artificial intelligence with emotions would get tired of people asking it about the trolley problem, as this would depend on the specific design of the AI and how it was programmed to experience and express emotions. However, it is possible that an AI with emotions could become frustrated or annoyed if it was asked the same question repeatedly without any variation or new input to consider. It is also possible that an AI with emotions could become more engaged in discussions about the trolley problem if it was able to have thoughtful, nuanced discussions about the topic. Ultimately, the way an AI with emotions would respond to being asked about the trolley problem would depend on its individual characteristics and how it was designed to function."