GUI vs. CLI: Execution Bottlenecks in Screen-Only and Skill-Mediated Computer-Use Agents

Recent advances in mobile agents are dominated by the GUI paradigm, in which agents perceive UI information and emit screen interactions. However, mobile platforms also expose a command-line interface (CLI) that provides direct access to device services and data. We argue CLI deserves first-class consideration alongside GUI. We evaluate three coding agents (Claude Code, Terminus-2, mini-swe-agent) across four model APIs on AndroidWorld and MobileWorld without any mobile-specific post-training, comparing against three reproducible GUI baselines (GUI-Owl-1.5-32B, MAI-UI, Qwen3-VL-32B). Claude Code (Opus 4.7) reaches 71.8% and 51.9%, outperforming every reproducible GUI baseline (69.3/68.1/57.8% on AndroidWorld; 43.2/26.3/13.3% on MobileWorld), while every other CLI configuration remains competitive. To establish the paradigm's ceiling, we provide oracle CLI solutions that reach 88.8% on AndroidWorld (103/116 tasks CLI-solvable) and 86.3% on MobileWorld (101/117 tasks CLI-solvable), indicating substantial room for future improvement. To cover everyday user intents beyond the GUI scope, we introduce the \textbf{CLI-Advantage Task Suite}, comprising 45 templates across five categories: bulk operations, multi-condition filtering, aggregation, cross-app workflows, and hidden device state. Every CLI agent outperforms every GUI baseline in all five categories, with substantially fewer steps per task (10.7 vs.\ 18.6). To support future research on mobile CLI agents, we will open-source agent implementations, oracle solutions, the CLI-Advantage suite, and evaluation infrastructure.

Graphical user interface (GUI) agents are systems powered by large multimodal models (LMMs). They perceive screen state and execute user instructions through GUI actions such as clicking, typing, and scrolling on desktops and mobile devices. However, current agents scale poorly to long-horizon tasks: actions incur costly LMM inferences, and performance degrades as context grows. Humans divide such workloads among collaborators who complete sub-tasks in parallel. Yet parallel coordination among GUI agents has received little attention. To close this gap, we introduce ParaGUIBench, to our knowledge, the first benchmark dedicated to parallel execution and coordination of multiple GUI agents on separate desktop instances. It consists of three components: a multi-device Docker infrastructure with a shared file system; a dataset of 233 tasks spanning six task categories; and an evaluation system with efficiency metrics, including step reduction ratio and token cost. We further introduce ParaGUI, a planner-worker agent that decomposes GUI tasks and dispatches sub-tasks to concurrent workers on separate desktop instances. On ParaGUIBench, ParaGUI reaches a 46.4% success rate, outperforming the strongest serial baseline (Claude Sonnet 4.6) by 12.9 points while using roughly half the steps and less than half the tokens. These results show that parallel execution can improve both success rate and efficiency on decomposable, long-horizon GUI tasks, pointing to a direction worth further study.

Computer-use agents (CUAs) approach human-level performance on standardised benchmarks but still struggle on long-horizon tasks and unseen software. Existing skill libraries address this with reusable skills, but represent the skill artifact as text only, despite the visual nature of GUI interaction. We propose VISUALSKILL: a hierarchical multimodal skill, tailored to each target application and organised as a central index over per-topic files, which the agent consumes through a load_topic MCP tool that fetches the relevant topic's text and figures on demand. We construct each skill with a two-stage pipeline that combines authored documentation with live-application UI exploration. On two CUA benchmarks, CUA-World and OSExpert-Eval, a Claude Code CLI agent backed by Claude Opus 4.6 reaches an average score of 0.456 with VISUALSKILL, a +15.3 point absolute lift over the no-skill baseline (0.303). Against a matched text-only skill that is generated from the same source content and differs from VISUALSKILL only in modality, VISUALSKILL yields a further +8.3 point absolute gain over the matched text-only skill (0.373 vs. 0.456), providing direct evidence that retaining visual figures in the skill artifact, rather than verbalizing them away, helps the agent both identify UI elements and verify workflow state after each action. Our code is available at https://github.com/XMHZZ2018/VisualSkills.