Agentic AI systems built on large language models (LLMs) offer significant potential for automating complex workflows, from software development to customer support. However, LLM agents often underperform due to suboptimal configurations; poorly tuned prompts, tool descriptions, and parameters that typically require weeks of manual refinement. Existing optimization methods either are too complex for general use or treat components in isolation, missing critical interdependencies. We present ARTEMIS, a no-code evolutionary optimization platform that jointly optimizes agent configurations through semantically-aware genetic operators. Given only a benchmark script and natural language goals, ARTEMIS automatically discovers configurable components, extracts performance signals from execution logs, and evolves configurations without requiring architectural modifications. We evaluate ARTEMIS on four representative agent systems: the \emph{ALE Agent} for competitive programming on AtCoder Heuristic Contest, achieving a \textbf{13.6% improvement} in acceptance rate; the \emph{Mini-SWE Agent} for code optimization on SWE-Perf, with a statistically significant \textbf{10.1% performance gain}; and the \emph{CrewAI Agent} for cost and mathematical reasoning on Math Odyssey, achieving a statistically significant \textbf{36.9% reduction} in the number of tokens required for evaluation. We also evaluate the \emph{MathTales-Teacher Agent} powered by a smaller open-source model (Qwen2.5-7B) on GSM8K primary-level mathematics problems, achieving a \textbf{22% accuracy improvement} and demonstrating that ARTEMIS can optimize agents based on both commercial and local models.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities as powerful components in agentic systems, enabling sophisticated reasoning and complex task execution. However, current approaches to manually designing and optimizing agentic systems heavily rely on manual effort, limiting their adaptability and scalability. Recent work has explored the automated optimization of workflow designs. However, these approaches often overlook the crucial role of model capabilities and focus on single performance metrics, failing to address real-world deployment constraints. In this paper, we present AgentFactory, a framework that jointly optimizes both foundation models and workflow structures in agentic systems while considering multiple objectives including performance, cost, and efficiency. AgentFactory leverages advanced LLMs as optimizers to navigate the vast search space of possible configurations, employing a three-stage optimization pipeline to automatically discover effective combinations of fine-tuned models and optimized workflows. Through an iterative optimization process, our framework systematically explores and evaluates different agentic system designs, adapting to task-specific requirements while maintaining operational efficiency. We evaluate AgentFactory across eight benchmarks spanning five domains, including general reasoning, coding, mathematics, medicine, and finance. Our experiments demonstrate that AgentFactory consistently outperforms both manually designed methods and existing automated approaches, achieving an average improvement of 9.1% across all benchmarks, with particularly significant gains in domain-specific tasks (19.6% on MedQA and 18.7% on FinEval). These results establish AgentFactory as a promising approach for developing more capable and efficient agentic systems through automated optimization.
LLM agents in interactive environments are highly sensitive to their prompts, yet prompt engineering remains a manual, task-specific process. We introduce an automated prompt optimization framework for LLM agents that decomposes the observation-to-action pipeline into a goal-conditioned descriptor agent and an action selection agent, and iteratively refines each module's prompt through an LLM-driven evolutionary loop guided by environment returns. We propose a behavior analyzer to attribute episode outcomes to specific prompt components, and a mutator to propose targeted revisions to the prompt, before validating them through environment rollouts. We evaluate on all five BabyAI tasks in the BALROG benchmark, comparing our pipeline against BALROG's RobustCoTAgent under both plain and guided prompt initializations. Optimization improves performance consistently across tasks and conditions, without requiring updates to the model weights. On PutNext, a multi-step coordination task where the RobustCoTAgent achieves 0% success, our framework reaches up to 72.5% success rate using the same underlying LLM with optimized prompts. These results suggest that a multi-agent framework, combined with automatic prompt optimization, enhances LLMs without the need for fine-tuning or extensive human supervision.
As LLMs are increasingly deployed within agentic systems, their capabilities depend not only on the model weights but also on the harness: the prompts, tools, control flow, memory, and orchestration code surrounding them. This makes automated harness optimization -- the iterative and evaluation-guided improvement of a harness by an AI system -- both an important route to improving AI systems and a demanding capability for AI systems themselves. Yet the community lacks a common protocol for measuring how well frontier LLMs perform at this task. We introduce HarnessOpt-Bench, a benchmark for end-to-end harness optimization under expensive and stochastic evaluation. An optimizer, an LLM paired with a coding harness, receives a target agent's seed harness, graded evaluation feedback, and a fixed target-evaluation budget. It edits the harness and nominates a final candidate, which is scored by its normalized gain over the seed on a held-out test partition that remains inaccessible throughout search. A trusted execution environment enforces the evaluation boundary, meters target-agent resource use, and preserves candidate versions for audit. We evaluate 5 frontier LLMs as optimizers both under a shared coding harness and under their native harnesses across 4 downstream tasks, over 111 scored runs. Experiment results show that optimizer models separate more than the coding harnesses they act through, native harnesses are not consistently superior, and gains vary substantially across tasks and seed regimes. These results establish harness optimization as a measurable and discriminative capability with large space for improvement.