SearchAuditor: Auditing and Attributing Failures in Long-Horizon Search Agents

Deep search agents answer difficult information-seeking questions by iteratively issuing search queries to gather supporting evidence, but it remains unclear whether and how greater search effort leads to better answers. We study these questions through a trajectory-level diagnosis of long-horizon search agents. Using human-annotated document-level relevance judgments, we evaluate the evidence retrieved at each search step and separate two stages of agent behavior: what evidence an agent retrieves and how effectively it uses that evidence. This distinction further allows us to decompose failures into retrieval gaps, where the necessary evidence is never found, and utilization gaps, where relevant evidence is retrieved but not used correctly. With the retrieval model and evaluation harness held fixed, we compare six agents on BrowseComp-Plus and further validate our findings on BrowseComp with an open-web search API. Across settings, we find that search effort and answer quality are only weakly aligned. Answer accuracy is better correlated with the quality of retrieved evidence, especially cumulative retrieval recall, than with the number of searches or the amount of context consumed. Useful evidence often appears early in the trajectory, yet agents tend to continue searching, producing a long tail of low-yield retrieval steps. At the query level, exploratory reformulations remain useful, but the best-performing agents issue far fewer redundant queries. Overall, by systematically characterizing the search behavior and failure modes of long-horizon search agents, this work points to practical directions for building better deep research systems, including stronger query formulation, more effective evidence selection and context management, and stopping criteria based on whether sufficient supporting evidence has been retrieved.

Deep-research agents solve tasks through long trajectories of search, tool use, evidence inspection, and answer synthesis. Evaluation based on final answers shows whether an agent succeeds, but not which parts of the trajectory make the answer unreliable. We study span-level error localization for deep-research agents. We collect 2,790 real trajectories from two agent frameworks, three backbone models, and three benchmarks, convert raw logs into semantic spans, and annotate harmful error spans through LLM-assisted expert review. From these annotations, we build TELBench, a 1,000-instance benchmark for identifying error spans among normal exploration, failed searches, tentative hypotheses, and harmless noise. We further propose DRIFT, a claim-centric auditing framework that tracks agent claims, checks their support in trajectory evidence, and marks spans where unsupported or conflicting claims affect the answer path. Experiments across model families and auditing frameworks show that DRIFT improves span-level error localization and first-error accuracy by up to 30 percentage points. Our work provides a process-level view of reliability in deep-research agents.

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have enabled search agents to autonomously tackle complex tasks across extended search and reasoning horizons. However, training effective search agents remains challenging due to the lack of scalable and long-horizon tasks, and the difficulty of evaluating and correcting intermediate reasoning and tool-use behaviors. We introduce SearchArt, a scalable framework for training long-horizon search agents through verification-driven task synthesis and a multi-stage post-training pipeline. SearchArt constructs large-scale datasets for complex search-, research- and user-oriented tasks by synthesizing diverse information-seeking QA pairs and corresponding search trajectories from web documents and automatically generated evidence graphs. To ensure the reliability of the synthesized data, we design a verification pipeline that jointly evaluates QA consistency, trajectory quality, and the relevance of retrieved evidence. The verified trajectories are subsequently used in a multi-stage training process comprising supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning-based policy optimization. Search agents trained with SearchArt exhibit adaptive search planning, iterative evidence aggregation, and complex reasoning over extended interaction horizons. Experimental results demonstrate that, with only (Qwen3.5-) 27B parameters, SearchArt scores 74.39 on BrowseComp-ZH, 70.06 on BrowseComp, and 52.55 on Deepresearch-bench, matching or surpassing frontier closed-source agents on both deepsearch and deepresearch benchmarks.