TraceSIR: A Multi-Agent Framework for Structured Analysis and Reporting of Agentic Execution Traces
Organizations: Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China · Zhipu AI, Beijing, China · Tsinghua University, Beijing, China · Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Abstract
Agentic systems augment large language models with external tools and iterative decision making, enabling complex tasks such as deep research, function calling, and coding. However, their long and intricate execution traces make failure diagnosis and root cause analysis extremely challenging. Manual inspection does not scale, while directly applying LLMs to raw traces is hindered by input length limits and unreliable reasoning. Focusing solely on final task outcomes further discards critical behavioral information required for accurate issue localization. To address these issues, we propose TraceSIR, a multi-agent framework for structured analysis and reporting of agentic execution traces. TraceSIR coordinates three specialized agents: (1) StructureAgent, which introduces a novel abstraction format, TraceFormat, to compress execution traces while preserving essential behavioral information; (2) InsightAgent, which performs fine-grained diagnosis including issue localization, root cause analysis, and optimization suggestions; (3) ReportAgent, which aggregates insights across task instances and generates comprehensive analysis reports. To evaluate TraceSIR, we construct TraceBench, covering three real-world agentic scenarios, and introduce ReportEval, an evaluation protocol for assessing the quality and usability of analysis reports aligned with industry needs. Experiments show that TraceSIR consistently produces coherent, informative, and actionable reports, significantly outperforming existing approaches across all evaluation dimensions. Our project and video are publicly available at https://github.com/SHU-XUN/TraceSIR.
Figures & tables
| Scenario | Method | Backbone | Overall Score | OS | EA | RCA | OA | OI | Ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deep Research | ClaudeCode | GLM-5 | 55.0 | 5.5 | 4.5 | 5.5 | 6.0 | 6.0 | 4 |
| ClaudeCode | Claude-4.6 | 66.0 | 6.5 | 7.5 | 5.5 | 7.0 | 6.5 | 2 | |
| TraceSIR | GLM-5 | 65.0 | 7.5 | 6.5 | 5.5 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 3 | |
| TraceSIR | Claude-4.6 | 81.0 | 8.5 | 8.5 | 8.0 | 7.0 | 8.5 | 1 | |
| Function Calling | ClaudeCode | GLM-5 | 40.0 | 5.0 | 3.5 | 4.5 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 4 |
| ClaudeCode | Claude-4.6 | 74.0 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 8.5 | 6.5 | 7.0 | 2 |
| Scenario | Method | Backbone | Overall Score | OS | EA | RCA | OA | OI | Ranking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deep Research | ClaudeCode | GLM-5 | 82.7 | 8.7 | 8.0 | 7.3 | 9.0 | 8.3 | 4 |
| ClaudeCode | Claude-4.6 | 90.0 | 9.3 | 8.7 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 2 | |
| TraceSIR | GLM-5 | 88.0 | 9.0 | 8.0 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 3 | |
| TraceSIR | Claude-4.6 | 91.3 | 9.3 | 9.0 | 9.3 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 1 | |
| Function Calling | ClaudeCode | GLM-5 | 80.7 | 8.3 | 7.3 | 7.7 | 9.0 | 8.0 | 4 |
| ClaudeCode | Claude-4.6 | 88.0 | 8.7 | 8.3 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 3 |
Appendix figures & tables2 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Category | Capability | TraceSIR | ClaudeCode |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Design | 1. Multi-agent architecture explicitly designed for analysis and reporting, with separated roles for trace structuring, diagnosis, and reporting | ||
| 2. Fine-grained, per-case diagnostic outputs with structured fields | |||
| 3. Native cross-case aggregation and statistical analysis over all traces | |||
| 4. Incremental analysis with resume support for large trace collections | |||
| 5. Configurable analysis and report constraints via explicit settings | |||
| Methodology | 1. Full execution trace modeling with explicit Thought–Action–Observation |
Agent Failure Analysis
Agent failure analysis studies how and why AI agents make errors, traces causes through execution, and helps detect or prevent recurrence.
See all 153 papers