Agentic embodied intelligence plays a foundational role in open-ended, dynamic physical environments. Rather than treating policy learning as an end-to-end mapping from instructions to actions, recent studies reveal that embodied systems depend not only on pre-trained foundation models, but also on harness. Prior approaches largely treat rollouts as static logs for post-hoc reflection, producing harness updates without autonomously testing and refining them through subsequent embodied interaction. To address this challenge, we propose VISTA, a meta-agent framework that transforms post-hoc rollout reflection into active self-exploration for embodied harness improvement. Specifically, VISTA maintains a harness graph that records the lineage of proposed harnesses, which enables the meta-agent to retrieve prior hypotheses, build on effective mechanisms, and avoid repeatedly exploring failed directions. Each iteration begins from a retained harness version and its execution evidence. Rather than directly committing an update from these historical trajectories, the meta-agent actively explores in the environment. It autonomously generates new rollouts, probes execution failures and recovery behaviors, and iteratively modifies the harness based on the resulting evidence. The refined harness is then evaluated afresh and added to the harness graph. We evaluate VISTA on the LIBERO-Pro, RoboCasa, and RoboTwin benchmarks. Experimental results demonstrate that VISTA progressively improves task success and is more rollout-efficient than static reflection, achieving higher success rates with fewer simulator rollouts.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: VISTA actively explores the environment to improve embodied-agent harnesses. Starting from an initial harness, a meta-agent inspects prior execution evidence, proposes revisions, and actively interacts with the environment to test hypotheses and refine candidate harnesses before formal evaluation.
Figure 2: Overview of VISTA. The meta-agent develops an embodied harness from versioned implementations and multimodal execution evidence. Within a development iteration, it interleaves code revision, active exploration, and autonomous candidate testing. After submission, the frozen candidate undergoes a separate autonomous evaluation under the declared development conditions. The selection rule determines whether it replaces the incumbent; both promoted and rejected versions remain in the history. The inner loop acquires evidence and refines a candidate, while the outer loop selects and retains harnesses across development iterations.
Method
Composite Seen
Composite Unseen
π0.5
6.8
0.9
RLDX-1
17.4
6.8
Initial harness H0
16.4
4.7
Evolved harness HVISTA
24.2
13.3
Δ over H0
+7.8
+8.6
Table 2: Success rate (%) on Composite Seen and Composite Unseen tasks in RoboCasa365. H0 is initialized from HarnessVLA. Δ is measured in percentage points.
Baselines [ 56 ]
Harness evolution
Method
π0.5
LingBot-VLA
HarnessVLA
H0
HVISTA
Success rate (%)
47.9
50.4
58.0
48.5
74.0
Table 3: Success rate (%) on RoboTwin.
Figure 3: Evolution progress of success rate (%) on LIBERO-Pro. Colors distinguish the four task suites; circles denote T and squares denote S.
Methods
R1
R2
Δ
Token
Δ
Token
Passive
+39.1
94.2M
+56.3
137.7M
Active
+50.0
42.2M
+85.9
91.6M
Table 4: Comparison of passive and active exploration on four LIBERO-Goal tasks. Δ is the mean improvement in success rate (percentage points) of the selected harness over the initial π0.5 -based harness H0 ; Token is the mean cumulative Meta tokens per task after each round.
Figure 4: Harness development trajectories. (a) Representative development patterns, including linear refinement, branching exploration, and branch recombination. (b) A trajectory on LIBERO Goal-t08. Internal nodes denote small-scale exploration and testing during development, while formal nodes evaluate frozen candidates on the complete task matrix and determine promotion. Success improves from 50.0% to 100.0%.
Figure 5: A representative harness development process on Goal-t09. The initial harness achieves 0.0% success. The first development round adds lift verification, a bounded re-localization and grasp retry, and an explicit transport-and-release procedure, improving performance to 56.3%. Analysis of the remaining failures then leads to a revision of the lift-state interpretation and release behavior, after which the final harness achieves 100.0% in autonomous evaluation.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure A1 : Execution and evidence infrastructure. The meta-agent communicates through a structured MCP interface. Historical inspection reads completed records; live development interacts with a private scene created from a frozen harness snapshot; and autonomous evaluation runs fresh episodes with no meta-agent intervention. All lanes use request, episode, and harness identities. Evidence is written to the run store, while package freezing and formal selection remain host-controlled. Historical depth is available only for trace modes that archive metric depth and calibration.
A private frozen-package session, decision-boundary observations, public capability probes, optional decision replacement, and diagnostic episode records.
Autonomous testing
evaluate , evaluation_status
A frozen candidate and fresh autonomous episodes for specified task–seed–repeat cells. Autonomous tests requested during development are diagnostic evidence only. Promotion is based on a separate host-initiated evaluation after submission.
Appendix
Table A1: Meta-agent interfaces in the VISTA implementation. Tools are grouped by their role in harness development.
Task
π0.5 (%)
H0
Evolved
Δ
DeliverStraw
0.0
6.3
12.5
+6.3
GetToastedBread
0.0
0.0
0.0
+0.0
KettleBoiling
2.0
6.3
18.8
+12.5
LoadDishwasher
2.0
37.5
43.8
+6.3
PackIdenticalLunches
4.0
0.0
18.8
+18.8
PreSoakPan
26.0
25.0
43.8
+18.8
Appendix
Table A4 : Per-task success rates (%) on the RoboCasa composite suites. π0.5 is the reference policy, H0 is the initial harness, and Evolved is the selected harness. Δ is the gain over H0 in percentage points.
Figure A2 : Per-task evolution on the four LIBERO-T suites. Rows are tasks and columns are development rounds (H0: initial harness). Solid cells report candidate successes out of 16 episodes. Dashed cells carry forward the last retained result after development stops. An em dash marks an incomplete evaluation (LIBERO-10 task9, R10). Right: retained-harness gain over H0. Bottom: aggregate retained scores.