This paper demonstrate that whether masking-based token pruning helps or hurts worst-group robustness can be predicted before deployment, without labels or fine-tuning. A systematic study of semantic masking across 8 spurious-correlation benchmarks shows its effect on worst-group accuracy is highly unstable: it improves accuracy by up to 82.5% relative on some datasets and degrades it by up to 100% on others.

We trace this instability to spurious inversion: background patches receive higher CLIP text-similarity than the true object when the spurious attribute is background-separable, inverting the assumption every text- and attention-guided pruning method relies on. We introduce the Spurious Inversion Metric (SIM), a label-free, pre-deployment diagnostic whose sign predicts this effect with statistical significance (binomial $p=0.035$) across all 8 datasets, and remains dependable across 6 CLIP architectures with a clean foreground/background split.

Naive masking is itself a major source of risk: it causes the largest average-accuracy loss of any method we evaluate, and its own per-image segmentation step is a significant runtime bottleneck. To address this, we design a batched, synchronization-free GPU segmentation routine that cuts this overhead from 3.5$\times$ to 1.75$\times$ baseline.

Gating deployment by SIM's sign recovers masking's benefits while avoiding its worst failures, matching or exceeding a strong pruning baseline on 7 of 8 datasets.