Web agents require diverse, executable, and resettable website environments for reproducible training and evaluation. Human-assisted mirrors demand per-site engineering, while generative construction can diverge from specified real websites. Capture-and-replay preserves observations, with interaction coverage constrained by captured content and replay capabilities. We present WebAnything, a fully automated framework that reconstructs source-grounded, reusable Web environments from real URLs without per-site manual implementation or repair after initial setup and authorization. An Explorer-Builder collects browser-observable structures, resources, and interaction outcomes; an independent verifier checks frozen candidates and guides local repair or targeted source recapture. We construct 244 website artifacts across 14 application domains and 53 categories, supporting 12,984 executed and accepted tasks. Compared with human-assisted WebHarbor, WebAnything achieves higher aggregate scores on three fidelity metrics, with 12 wins, two ties, and no losses in a blind audit. Fine-tuning Qwen3.5-9B on 5,856 interaction trajectories improves REAL success by 9.9 percentage points, Odysseys-Easy Rubric Avg and Task Avg by 6.25 and 6.32 percentage points, and WebArena-Verified Overall success by 13.33 percentage points under the fixed harness. Code: https://github.com/china-qijizhifeng/Web-Anything
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Trade-offs in real-website environment construction. Human-assisted mirrors require per-site engineering; generative methods need source correspondence; replay coverage depends on captured content and replay capabilities. WebAnything combines source-grounded reconstruction, independent verification, and iterative refinement.
Figure 2: WebAnything reconstruction pipeline. Source evidence guides executable construction. Independent checks of frozen candidates drive local repair or targeted recapture; verified candidates are released with repeatable interaction and task-evaluation interfaces.
Figure 3: Cross-domain resource supply: 244 website artifacts across 14 application domains and 53 fine-grained categories, with the domain distribution at right.
A: Automated fidelity metrics
Comparison subset
System
Sites/states
Pixel ↑
SSIM ↑
Text F1 ↑
Five shared WebHarbor sites
WebAnything
5 / 14
0.9240
0.7904
0.8541
Same subset
WebHarbor
5 / 14
0.8083
0.6260
0.2617
VeriEnv LinkedIn
WebAnything
1 / 4
0.9574
0.8190
N/A
Same subset
VeriEnv
1 / 4
0.9436
0.7637
N/A
Table 1a: Historical source-state fidelity. Automated metrics are aggregated within sites, then equally averaged across the five-site, 14-state WebHarbor subset; the four historical LinkedIn states are reported separately. Human blind-audit wins, ties, and losses compare WebAnything against WebHarbor.
System
Capability coverage
Executed-test success
All-test pass
Five-site WebHarbor comparison
WebAnything
15/20 (75%)
19/20 (95%)
19/30 (63.3%)
WebHarbor
16/20 (80%)
23/23 (100%)
23/30 (76.7%)
Five-site VeriEnv comparison
Selected pool artifacts
22/22 (100%)
29/31 (93.5%)
29/33 (87.9%)
VeriEnv
20/22 (90.9%)
21/28 (75.0%)
21/33 (63.6%)
Table 1b: Offline interaction validity on separate five-site subsets. Capability coverage counts tested capabilities; executed-test success uses executed tests; all-test pass retains unsupported and blocked tests. Persistence and state-restoration results appear in Appendix A.7 .
Training setting
REAL
Odysseys-Easy
Success ↑
Rubric Avg ↑
Task Avg ↑
Perfect ↑
Qwen3.5-9B
24.2
19.71
18.86
4.55
+ WebAnything SFT
34.1
25.96
25.18
9.09
Δ
+9.9pp
+6.25pp
+6.32pp
+4.55pp
Table 2: Downstream SFT results. REAL and Odysseys-Easy use 91 and 44 jointly valid tasks. WebArena-Verified uses our own implementation of the fixed harness with strict scoring. Values are percentages.
Training data
Rubric Avg
Task Avg
Perfect
WebHarbor
6.93
7.79
0.00
VeriEnv
6.42
7.53
0.00
WebAnything
10.44
11.70
0.53
Table 3: Odysseys-All on 189 jointly valid tasks (%). Perfect counts: WebAnything 1/189; both baselines 0/189. Data and validity definitions: Appendix E.2 .
Appendix figures & tables13 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
System
B sites
A states and reference limitations
WebHarbor
5/5
Five sites/14 states; historical Apple and ESPN references have rendering defects
VeriEnv
5/5
LinkedIn/four states; Coursera is excluded from historical paired scoring; the other three sites lack historical references
Appendix
Table 4: External artifact eligibility for RQ2. A denotes historical paired fidelity; B denotes offline interaction validity.
Figure 4: Blind-audit page comparisons between historical source references and reconstructed mirrors. Rows show Apple iPad and a Cambridge Dictionary entry. Q1/Q2 indicate overall and information-fidelity preferences; Q3 indicates discrepancy severity: 0 equivalent, 1 minor, and 2 severe. Automated Text F1 is annotated separately from human ratings. The historical Apple reference records a failed font-stylesheet request. Aggregate blind-audit results across all 14 states are reported in Table 1a .
Site
Artifact
Paired/preset states
Pixel
SSIM
Text F1
Coursera
Selected pool artifact
2/2
0.7017
0.4742
0.4236
VeriEnv
2/2
0.7466
0.5338
0.1928
Weather
Selected pool artifact
1/2
0.6373
0.4386
0.1955
VeriEnv
1/2
0.5188
0.4018
0.1396
Apartments
Both; source 403
0/2
N/A
N/A
N/A
Discogs
Both; source 403/access challenge
0/2
N/A
N/A
N/A
Appendix
Table 5: Current-source spot checks. Paired/preset states retain all planned states; means use the same pages that render normally on both sides. Source unavailability and mirror runtime failures are reported separately. Product scope, location, and live-content conditions follow the protocol in this section.
System
Capability coverage
Executed-test success rate
All-test pass rate
Startup
Persistence
Initial-state restoration
Five-site WebHarbor comparison
WebAnything
15/20 (75%)
19/20 (95%)
19/30 (63.3%)
5/5
1/1
1/1
WebHarbor
16/20 (80%)
23/23 (100%)
23/30 (76.7%)
5/5
2/3
3/3
Five-site VeriEnv comparison
Selected pool artifacts a
22/22 (100%)
29/31 (93.5%)
29/33 (87.9%)
5/5
6/6
5/5
VeriEnv
20/22 (90.9%)
21/28 (75.0%)
21/33 (63.6%)
5/5
4/4 b
5/5
Appendix
Table 6: Interaction validity of selected frozen environments. WebHarbor and VeriEnv are tested on their respective five-site subsets. We report capability coverage, success rate over executed tests, and pass rate over all predefined tests. External network access is disabled; explicit test adapters restore state.
Independent outcome
Pairs
Share
Passed
56
25.57%
Failed
139
63.47%
Source blocked
24
10.96%
Of these: evidence-supported discrepancies
39
17.81%
Appendix
Table 7: Independent verification of submitted candidates with passing builder self-checks. The first three outcomes are mutually exclusive; the last row is a subset of failures supported by concrete defect evidence.
Figure 5: Historical verification cases. Stashmedia reveals a same-candidate resource-check omission; Ctrip traces feedback-driven revision and issue-level independent reverification; ACCA illustrates additional control and visual defects. Evidence scopes are specified in Appendix B.8 .
Figure 6: Diversity and interaction complexity of 6,172 accepted source tasks spanning 74 site labels and 14 task application domains. (a) Six automated, overlapping capability attributes derived from instructions, trajectories, and website information, each using 6,172 as the denominator. (b) Grouped distribution of executed tool-interaction steps; approximately 34.7% of tasks exceed 10 steps.
Table 9: Observed interaction complexity of accepted tasks. Tool operations, URL states, and page paths are counted separately from actual trajectories.
Tool-interaction steps
Tasks
Share
0
4
0.1%
1
38
0.6%
2–5
2,092
33.9%
6–10
1,899
30.8%
11–20
1,498
24.3%
21–30
399
6.5%
Appendix
Table 10: Bins of observed tool-interaction steps. Rounded shares may not sum to 100%.
Item
Recovered configuration
Training method and parameter scope
Supervised fine-tuning; trainable language model, frozen vision encoder and projection layer; BF16
Training-data counts
6,172 accepted source tasks; 5,856 training trajectories; 5,167 unique training task IDs; 60,517 step-level samples
Samples and checkpoint
60,517 step-level samples; step-473 checkpoint; approximately two nominal data passes
Optimizer
Adam with decoupled weight decay 10−4 ; β1=0.9 , β2=0.95 , ϵ=10−8
Learning rate and schedule
5×10−6 , minimum 0; cosine decay; 24 warmup steps
Batch size and randomness
Global batch size 256, microbatch size 1; random and mixing seeds both 42
Appendix
Table 11: Actual configuration associated with the step-473 training run, cross-checked against command overrides, optimizer logs, and checkpoint records.
Training data
Trajectories
Training rows
WebHarbor (Core16)
617
5,240
WebAnything (all661)
661
5,520
VeriEnv
663
9,244
Appendix
Table 12: Final training-set sizes for the data-source comparison. Row counts refer to training-file records.
Metric
WebAnything
WebHarbor
VeriEnv
Valid tasks
194
196
197
Rubric Avg
10.73
6.98
6.62
Task Avg
12.12
7.81
7.77
Perfect
0.52
0.00
0.00
Perfect count
1/194
0/196
0/197
Appendix
Table 13: Odysseys-All results using each model’s own valid-task set. Score values are percentages. The common 189-task comparison is reported separately in Table 3 .
Frontier LLMs can navigate complex websites, but their cost and reliance on third-party APIs make local deployment impractical. We introduce Agent-as-Annotators, a framework that structures synthetic trajectory generation for web agents by analogy to human annotation roles, replacing the Task Designer, Annotator, and Supervisor with modular LLM components. Using Gemini 3 Pro as teacher, we generate 3,000 trajectories across six web environments and fine-tune a 9B-parameter student with pure supervised learning on the 2,322 that pass quality filtering. The resulting model achieves 41.5% on WebArena, surpassing closed-source models such as Claude 3.5 Sonnet (36.0%) and GPT-4o (31.5%) under the same evaluation protocol, and nearly doubling the previous best open-weight result (Go-Browse, 21.7%). Capabilities transfer to unseen environments, with an 18.2 percentage point gain on WorkArena L1 (an enterprise platform never seen during training) and consistent improvements across three additional benchmarks. Ablations confirm that each pipeline component contributes meaningfully, with Judge filtering, evaluation hints, and reasoning traces each accounting for measurable gains. These results demonstrate that structured trajectory synthesis from a single frontier teacher is sufficient to produce competitive, locally deployable web agents. Project page: https://agent-as-annotators.github.io
Training agents for front-end web development requires demonstrations of code editing, execution, browser inspection and revision, yet public trajectories and reusable task environments remain limited. We introduce WebUniverse, a pipeline that constructs verifiable tasks with verified development trajectories from open-source repositories and real web pages. The tasks cover text-grounded application development in standalone and iterative settings and vision-grounded reproduction across pages and viewports. We collect agent trajectories for these tasks and verify the resulting applications against task-specific functional or visual requirements. We release WebUniverse-Env, containing 15K executable task environments, and WebUniverse-Mix, containing the corresponding 15K development trajectories with verification records and scores. Fine-tuning Qwen3.5-35B-A3B on WebUniverse-Mix raises the Vision2Web average score from 51.7 to 68.3, WebGen-Bench accuracy from 34.5% to 63.9%, and Web-Bench pass@2 from 12.2% to 23.1%. The resulting model also outperforms a public-data baseline trained with the same configuration and sample budget across all reported metrics. Ablations show complementary benefits from text and visual trajectories and continued gains as training data scales from 5K to 15K trajectories.
Yaorui Ding, Fengqing Jiang, Yichen Feng +8
University of Washington · Western Washington University · King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology +1
Training autonomous web agents is fundamentally limited by the environments they learn from: real-world websites are unsafe to explore, hard to reset, and rarely provide verifiable feedback. We propose VeriEnv, a framework that treats language models as environment creators, automatically cloning real-world websites into fully executable, verifiable synthetic environments. By exposing controlled internal access via a Python SDK, VeriEnv enables agents to self-generate tasks with deterministic, programmatically verifiable rewards, eliminating reliance on heuristic or LLM-based judges. This design decouples agent learning from unsafe real-world interaction while enabling scalable self-evolution through environment expansion. Through experiments on web agent benchmarks, we show that agents trained with VeriEnv generalize to unseen websites, achieve site-specific mastery through self-evolving training, and benefit from scaling the number of training environments. Code and resources will be released at https://github.com/kyle8581/VeriEnv upon acceptance.
Hyungjoo Chae, Jungsoo Park, Alan Ritter
School of Interactive Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology