cs.CVApr 2, 2026

GeoAI Agency Primitives

Authors: Akram Zaytar, Rohan Sawahn, Caleb Robinson, Gilles Q. Hacheme, Girmaw A. Tadesse, Inbal Becker-Reshef, Rahul Dodhia, Juan Lavista Ferres

Organizations: Microsoft AI for Good Lab · NASA Harvest

Abstract

We present ongoing research on agency primitives for GeoAI assistants -- core capabilities that connect Foundation models to the artifact-centric, human-in-the-loop workflows where GIS practitioners actually work. Despite advances in satellite image captioning, visual question answering, and promptable segmentation, these capabilities have not translated into productivity gains for practitioners who spend most of their time producing vector layers, raster maps, and cartographic products. The gap is not model capability alone but the absence of an agency layer that supports iterative collaboration. We propose a vocabulary of 99 primitives for such a layer -- including navigation, perception, geo-referenced memory, and dual modeling -- along with a benchmark that measures human productivity. Our goal is a vocabulary that makes agentic assistance in GIS implementable, testable, and comparable.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables1 asset

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

Oct 11, 2026

Google Earth AI Geospatial Reasoning Agent: Capabilities and a Systematic Evaluation

Google Earth AI is a family of geospatial AI models, together with an agent that orchestrates them. We present this agent, Google Earth AI's Geospatial Reasoning agent (GRA), a Gemini-powered research system that combines geospatial data sources, foundation models, and tools to answer questions about our planet. GRA organizes these into modular domain skills and pairs them with upfront geospatial planning to decompose complex queries into multi-stage workflows. Evaluating such systems is hard: real-world problems admit multiple valid workflows, require data discovery across large catalogs, and rely on evolving ground truth. We introduce two benchmarks and release their development splits. GeoExpertQueries poses complex analytical problems grounded in practitioner use cases and refined by geospatial experts; each is paired with a consensus golden workflow from three independent experts and scored by a human-validated, tool-agnostic autorater. GeoKTools consists of templated queries with deterministic reference solvers that systematically vary the number of required tool types. We also use two external benchmarks, CBGB and UnivEARTH; the latter we find to be saturated. To isolate the contribution of GRA's tools and its agentic orchestration, we compare four configurations, each with Gemini 3.1 Pro and 3.8 Flash: a standalone LLM, the LLM with basic tools, the LLM with GRA's skills and tools but without its upfront planning and execution guidance, and GRA itself. With at most basic tools, an advanced model recovers much of the answer on templated queries but satisfies only a small fraction of the expert workflows on open-ended problems; GRA performs well on both. The largest step comes from GRA's skills and tools; on open-ended problems, its planning and execution guidance add a further gain with Gemini 3.8 Flash, letting Flash match or exceed Pro at lower cost.
Aug 3, 2026

GISAgentBench: A Practitioner-Sourced Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents on GIS Tasks

Geographic Information System (GIS) professionals rely on multi-step spatial analysis workflows to support decision-making in urban planning, disaster response, and environmental monitoring. The process is tedious, time-consuming, and error-prone. While recent large language model (LLM) agents equipped with external tools have the potential to automate geospatial analysis, their ability to perform realistic GIS workflows remains largely unexplored. Existing GIS agent benchmarking datasets are mostly drawn from textbooks, tutorials, or LLM-generated seeds and remain limited in size and trajectory depth. More importantly, none provides ground truth outputs. They therefore rely on surrogate signals such as code similarity, trajectory matching, or LLM and VLM judges, which can conflate workflow resemblance with task correctness. To address this gap, we introduce GISAgentBench, a benchmark of 349 multi-step GIS tasks curated from GIS Stack Exchange and instantiated on real public data across six selected geographic areas of interest. Each task ships with an executable reference trajectory and an exact ground truth output file, enabling strict, deterministic, tolerance-aware output matching beyond LLM judging. Evaluations of six LLM models reveal that realistic GIS workflows remain challenging: the best agent completes only 32.7% of tasks under strict tolerance-aware scoring, although most models produce outputs that are close to the ground truth.
Mar 27, 2026

GISclaw: A Comprehensive Open-Source LLM Agent System for Realistic Multi-Step Geospatial Analysis

Most LLM-driven GIS assistants solve narrow single-step tasks tightly coupled to proprietary platforms such as ArcGIS or QGIS, limiting their use for the multi-step, cross-format pipelines that define professional geospatial analysis. We present GISclaw, a comprehensive open-source agent system that performs realistic GIS analysis end to end - spatial joins, raster algebra, kriging interpolation, machine-learning classification, network analysis, choropleth cartography - directly through Python with no commercial GIS dependency. GISclaw couples an LLM reasoning core with a persistent Python sandbox pre-loaded with the open-source geospatial stack, three engineered prompt rules (Schema Analysis, Package Constraint, Domain Knowledge Injection), and an Error-Memory module for self-correction. A single backend-agnostic architecture supports both cloud-API and locally deployed open-weight LLM backends, enabling air-gapped deployment without loss of capability. On GeoAnalystBench - 50 expert-curated multi-step tasks averaging 5.8 analytical steps across vector, raster, and tabular data - GISclaw reaches up to 100% task success and 97% mean success over three independent runs. We further conduct 1,800 controlled experiments (50 tasks x 6 backends x 2 architectures x 3 repeats) with bootstrap 95% CIs, paired Wilcoxon tests, and a composite-score sensitivity analysis (Kendall's tau median = 0.94), and introduce a three-layer evaluation protocol combining code structure, reasoning process, and type-specific output verification. The Single-Agent ReAct loop reliably outperforms the Dual-Agent Plan-Execute-Replan pipeline on every cloud backend (Cliff's delta = 0.15-0.41); only the locally deployed 14B model gains from multi-agent orchestration, suggesting architectural complexity should match model capability rather than be added by default.