Time series research is moving beyond fixed forecasting benchmarks toward realistic tasks that combine prediction, contextual reasoning, tool use, and structured decision support. Most benchmarks are built around clean data and short evaluation loops; agents alone may miss temporal constraints, evidence checks, or review before finalizing outputs. We first formalize next-generation time series tasks as three-component tuples consisting of a task file, a workspace, and a validation interface. We then present AION, a time series harness built from six component groups: agents, skills, rules, memory, evaluation, and protocols. In this harness, we use three design principles: temporal grounding, temporal knowledge-grounded reasoning, and reliability mechanisms such as post-experiment analysis and layered review. A Kaggle Store Sales case study shows that the harness produces more detailed process traces, more artifacts, and more review steps than the same base agent operating in OpenCode direct build mode. Taken together, these results argue for a paradigm shift from fixed tasks to realistic ones under real-world constraints.
Time series data inform critical decisions across many real-world domains. While large language model (LLM) agents can analyze data through natural language and tools, it remains unclear whether they can conduct reliable time series analysis across multi-turn conversations. Existing benchmarks focus on single-step tasks such as forecasting and anomaly detection, overlooking practical workflows where user goals evolve, agents must build on prior analyses, and conclusions emerge from accumulated evidence. In this work, we introduce TimeSage-MT, a multi-turn benchmark for agentic time series reasoning with 240 tasks and 2,680 dialogue turns across 8 real-world domains, spanning basic exploration to decision-oriented analysis. TimeSage-MT is built through a reproducible pipeline that converts real-world time series data into multi-turn conversations with verifiable answers. It provides a unified evaluation protocol and public leaderboard for comparing time series agentic systems. To demonstrate the benchmark's utility, we evaluate frontier LLMs alongside TimeSage, a novel structured agent equipped with a comprehensive time series skill library. The results show sharp performance drops on decision-oriented tasks, driven by failures in memory, uncertainty handling, and domain-based decision making. TimeSage-MT exposes critical gaps in current agentic reasoning and provides a rigorous foundation for future development.
Time series agents answer analytical questions by calling external tools, and which tools they carry is decided by people before the agent runs. However, we identify two failures in this setup. Human-Agent Tool Misalignment: a library of 21 expert-curated tools helps on some tasks and hurts on others, dropping anomaly accuracy under every backbone we test. Silent Harm: one round of generic self-revision changes 147 answers and breaks 56 of them, while the final score moves by less than a point. Both follow from the same gap: whether a tool helps is decided question by question at runtime, while tools are supplied in advance and judged by a single average. To address this, we propose TimeEvo, which clusters an agent's diagnosed failures into capability gaps, plans a measurement for each, synthesizes evidence-only tools that fill them, and admits the candidate library only through a paired admission gate. Experiments on ten time series QA tasks and three backbones show that TimeEvo, starting from an empty library, improves accuracy on every task and every backbone, and that a library grown on a cheap model still gains when it is installed into stronger ones. Code is available at https://github.com/Muyiiiii/TimeEvo.
Time series analysis underpins forecasting, monitoring, and decision making in domains such as finance and weather, where solving a task often requires both numerical accuracy and contextual reasoning. Recent progress has moved from specialized neural predictors to approaches built on LLMs and foundation models that can reason over time series inputs and use external tools. However, most such systems remain execution-centric: they focus on solving the current instance but learn little from exploratory execution. This is especially limiting in verifiable numeric settings, where multiple candidate executions and tool-use procedures may all be task-valid yet differ sharply in quantitative quality, and where early success can trigger tool-prior collapse that suppresses further exploration. To address this limitation, we present TimeClaw, an exploratory execution learning framework that turns exploratory execution into reusable hierarchical distilled experience through a four-stage loop: Explore, Compare, Distill, and Reinject. TimeClaw combines metric-supervised exploratory execution learning, task-aware tool dropout, and hierarchical distilled experience for inference-time reinjection, while keeping the base model frozen and avoiding online test-time adaptation. In an MTBench-aligned evaluation with 17 tasks that span finance and weather prediction and reasoning tasks, TimeClaw delivers consistent gains over the baselines. These results suggest that, for scientific systems, the bottleneck is not only execution-time capability, but how exploratory experience is compared, distilled, and reused.