Agent Evaluation

Ask about this topic

Overview

Agent evaluation studies whether AI systems can use tools, navigate changing environments, and complete multi-step tasks reliably—not just produce plausible answers. Benchmarks span software engineering, web and computer use, voice, and domain workflows, while methods include executable verifiers, human or model judges, and analysis of action traces and intermediate states. Researchers increasingly measure process quality, evidence use, safety, cost, latency, and recovery alongside task success. A central tension is making evaluations realistic and broad while keeping scores reproducible and trustworthy, especially when results depend on the agent’s harness, scoring rules, or evaluation channel.

Latest papers

CardsList

144 papers30 papers in the last four weeks, up 25% on the four weeks before. 0.2% of all new papers.

Apr 26, 2026

ClawMark: A Living-World Benchmark for Multi-Turn, Multi-Day, Multimodal Coworker Agents

Language-model agents are increasingly used as persistent coworkers that assist users across multiple working days. During such workflows, the surrounding environment may change independently of the agent: new emails arrive, calendar entries shift, knowledge-base records are updated, and evidence appears across images, scanned PDFs, audio, video, and spreadsheets. Existing benchmarks do not adequately evaluate this setting because they typically run within a single static episode and remain largely text-centric. We introduce \bench{}, a benchmark for coworker agents built around multi-turn multi-day tasks, a stateful sandboxed service environment whose state evolves between turns, and rule-based verification. The current release contains 100 tasks across 13 professional scenarios, executed against five stateful sandboxed services (filesystem, email, calendar, knowledge base, spreadsheet) and scored by 1537 deterministic Python checkers over post-execution service state; no LLM-as-judge is invoked during scoring. We benchmark seven frontier agent systems. The strongest model reaches 75.8 weighted score, but the best strict Task Success is only 20.0%, indicating that partial progress is common while complete end-to-end workflow completion remains rare. Turn-level analysis shows that performance drops after the first exogenous environment update, highlighting adaptation to changing state as a key open challenge. We release the benchmark, evaluation harness, and construction pipeline to support reproducible coworker-agent evaluation.

Fanqing Meng, Lingxiao Du, Zijian Wu +46

Computer-Use Agent BenchmarksLLM Agent EvaluationLong-Horizon Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationAI Agent BenchmarksMultimodal Agents
AskPDF
Apr 26, 2026

AgentEval: DAG-Structured Step-Level Evaluation for Agentic Workflows with Error Propagation Tracking

Agentic systems that chain reasoning, tool use, and synthesis into multi-step workflows are entering production, yet prevailing evaluation practices like end-to-end outcome checks and ad-hoc trace inspection systematically mask the intermediate failures that dominate real-world error budgets. We present AgentEval, a framework that formalizes agent executions as evaluation directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), where each node carries typed quality metrics assessed by a calibrated LLM judge (GPT-4o), classified through a hierarchical failure taxonomy (3 levels, 21 subcategories), and linked to upstream dependencies for automated root cause attribution. An ablation study isolates the impact of DAG-based dependency modeling: it alone contributes +22 percentage points to failure detection recall and +34 pp to root cause accuracy over flat step-level evaluation with identical judges and rubrics. Across three production workflows (450 test cases, two agent model families, predominantly sequential architectures with a 12% non-DAG trace rate), AgentEval achieves 2.17x higher failure detection recall than end-to-end evaluation (0.89 vs. 0.41), Cohen's kappa = 0.84 agreement with human experts, and 72% root cause accuracy against an 81% human ceiling. Cross-system evaluation on tau-bench and SWE-bench traces confirms transferability (failure detection recall >= 0.78) without taxonomy or rubric modification. A 4-month pilot with 18 engineers detected 23 pre-release regressions through CI/CD-integrated regression testing, reducing median root-cause identification time from 4.2 hours to 22 minutes and driving measurable failure rate reductions in two workflows.

Dongxin Guo, Jikun Wu, Siu Ming Yiu

The University of Hong Kong · Stellaris AI Limited

Agent Failure AnalysisAI Agent EvaluationAgentic WorkflowsAgent Evaluation
AskPDF
Apr 20, 2026

ClawEnvKit: Automatic Environment Generation for Claw-Like Agents

Constructing environments for training and evaluating claw-like agents remains a manual, human-intensive process that does not scale. We argue that what is needed is not just a dataset, but an automated pipeline capable of generating diverse, verified environments on demand. To this end, we introduce ClawEnvKit, an autonomous generation pipeline that instantiates this formalism from natural language descriptions. The pipeline comprises three modules: (1) a parser that extracts structured generation parameters from natural language input; (2) a generator that produces the task specification, tool interface, and scoring configuration; and (3) a validator that enforces feasibility, diversity, structural validity, and internal consistency across the generated environments. Using ClawEnvKit, we construct Auto-ClawEval, the first large-scale benchmark for claw-like agents, comprising 1,040 environments across 24 categories. Empirically, Auto-ClawEval matches or exceeds human-curated environments on coherence and clarity at 13,800x lower cost. Evaluated across 4 model families and 8 agent harness frameworks, we find that harness engineering boosts performance by up to 15.7 percentage points over a bare ReAct baseline, completion remains the primary axis of variation with no model saturating the benchmark, and automated generation enables evaluation at a scale previously infeasible. Beyond static benchmarking, ClawEnvKit enables live evaluation: users describe a desired capability in natural language and obtain a verified environment on demand, turning evaluation into a continuous, user-driven process. The same mechanism serves as an on-demand training environment generator, producing task distributions that adapt to an agent's current weaknesses rather than being bounded by existing user logs.

Xirui Li, Ming Li, Ion Stoica +2

University of Maryland · 5Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence · 2Arena +2

Agent EvaluationAI Agent BenchmarksTool-Using AgentsAutomated Evaluation
AskPDF
Apr 16, 2026

From Reactive to Proactive: Assessing the Proactivity of Voice Agents via ProVoice-Bench

Recent advancements in LLM agents are gradually shifting from reactive, text-based paradigms toward proactive, multimodal interaction. However, existing benchmarks primarily focus on reactive responses, overlooking the complexities of proactive intervention and monitoring. To bridge this gap, we introduce ProVoice-Bench, the first evaluation framework specifically designed for proactive voice agents, featuring four novel tasks. By leveraging a multi-stage data synthesis pipeline, we curate 1,182 high-quality samples for rigorous testing. Our evaluation of state-of-the-art Multimodal LLMs reveals a significant performance gap, particularly regarding over-triggering and reasoning capabilities. These findings highlight the limitations of current models and offer a roadmap for developing more natural, context-aware proactive agents.

Ke Xu, Yuhao Wang, Yu Wang

Shanghai Jiao Tong University

LLM Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationAI Agent BenchmarksMultimodal Model Evaluation
AskPDF
Apr 13, 2026

RPA-Check: A Multi-Stage Automated Framework for Evaluating Dynamic LLM-based Role-Playing Agents

The rapid adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) in interactive systems has enabled the creation of dynamic, open-ended Role-Playing Agents (RPAs). However, evaluating these agents remains a significant challenge, as standard NLP metrics fail to capture the nuances of role adherence, logical consistency, and long-term narrative stability. This paper introduces RPA-Check, a multi-stage automated evaluation framework designed to objectively assess the performance of LLM-based RPAs in complex, constraints-heavy environments. Our methodology is based on a four-step pipeline: (1) Dimension Definition, establishing high-level qualitative behavioral criteria; (2) Augmentation, where these requirements are expanded into granular boolean checklist indicators; (3) Semantic Filtering, to ensure indicator objectivity, no redundancy and agent isolation; and (4) LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluation, which employs chain-of-thought verification to score agent fidelity. We validate this framework by applying it to LLM Court, a serious game for forensic training involving several quantized local models. Experimental results across five distinct legal scenarios demonstrate the framework's ability to identify subtle trade-offs between model size, reasoning depth, and operational stability. Notably, the findings reveal an inverse relationship between parametric scale and procedural consistency, showing that smaller, adequately instruction-tuned models (8-9B) can outperform larger architectures prone to user-alignment bias or sycophancy. RPA-Check thus provides a standardized and reproducible metric for future research in generative agent evaluation within specialized domains.

Riccardo Rosati, Edoardo Colucci, Massimiliano Bolognini +2

Department of Political Sciences, Communication and International Relations, University of Macerata, Via Don Minzoni 22/A, Macerata, 62100, Italy · Deparment of Information Engineering, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 12, Ancona, 60131, Italy · Department of Law, University of Macerata, Piaggia dell’Università 2, Macerata, 62100, Italy

Role-Playing Agent EvaluationLLM Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationLarge Language Model-Based Role-Play SimulationRubric-Based Evaluation
AskPDF
Apr 10, 2026

SAGE: A Service Agent Graph-guided Evaluation Benchmark

The development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has catalyzed automation in customer service, yet benchmarking their performance remains challenging. Existing benchmarks predominantly rely on static paradigms and single-dimensional metrics, failing to account for diverse user behaviors or the strict adherence to structured Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) required in real-world deployments. To bridge this gap, we propose SAGE (Service Agent Graph-guided Evaluation), a universal multi-agent benchmark for automated, dual-axis assessment. SAGE formalizes unstructured SOPs into Dynamic Dialogue Graphs, enabling precise verification of logical compliance and comprehensive path coverage. We introduce an Adversarial Intent Taxonomy and a modular Extension Mechanism, enabling low-cost deployment across domains and facilitating automated dialogue data synthesis. Evaluation is conducted via a framework where Judge Agents and a Rule Engine analyze interactions between User and Service Agents to generate deterministic ground truth. Extensive experiments on 27 LLMs across 6 industrial scenarios reveal a significant Execution Gap'' where models accurately classify intents but fail to derive correct subsequent actions. We also observe Empathy Resilience'', a phenomenon where models maintain polite conversational facades despite underlying logical failures under high adversarial intensity. Code and resources are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/SAGE-Bench-4CD3/.

Ling Shi, Yuqin Dai, Ziyin Wang +7

Tianjin University, Tianjin, China · Tsinghua University, Beijing, China · Beihang University, Beijing, China +3

LLM Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationAI Agent BenchmarksCustomer Support Automation
AskPDF
Apr 8, 2026

Where Did It Go Wrong? Process-Level Evaluation of Web Agents with Semantic State Tracking

Web agents act through long interaction sequences, yet existing benchmarks evaluate only terminal success, discarding all process information and offering little guidance on improvement. In this work, we conduct a process-level analysis of web agents. We introduce WebStep, a benchmark of 1,800 task instances with controlled difficulty and automatic semantic state tracking. Each website exposes a deterministic semantic MDP alongside the GUI: the agent operates on the interface, while the environment records high-level states and transitions in the background, enabling fine-grained analysis without manual annotation. Based on the semantic trajectory, we first show that process metrics reveal differences invisible to outcome evaluation: three agents whose success rates cluster within 34-37% diverge in exploration reach versus execution accuracy. Then, decomposing by skill characterizes the nature of these differences, exposing opposite per-skill rankings hidden within the same website: e.g., on Q&A, Claude CUA outperforms OpenAI CUA by 30% on navigation actions yet underperforms it by 6.7% on inspection, pinpointing a concrete skill to improve even within a domain. Bifurcation analysis further localizes the decisive error that loses the task and shows that this error is agent-specific rather than shared. Finally, these differences widen as tasks grow harder: success rate is similar on easy tasks but separates sharply as exploration becomes more demanding. Our process-level analysis opens a new avenue in web agent evaluation, providing fine-grained and actionable insight into where and how each agent should be improved. Project page: https://jiwanchung.github.io/webstep

Jiwan Chung, JiHyuk Byun, Vibhav Vineet +1

Yonsei University · Microsoft Research

Process-Based Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationAI Agent EvaluationWeb AgentsWeb Agent BenchmarksState Tracking
AskPDF
Apr 3, 2026

Agentic-MME: What Agentic Capability Really Brings to Multimodal Intelligence?

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are evolving from passive observers into active agents, solving problems through Visual Expansion (invoking visual tools) and Knowledge Expansion (open-web search). However, existing evaluations fall short: they lack flexible tool integration, test visual and search tools separately, and evaluate primarily by final answers. Consequently, they cannot verify if tools were actually invoked, applied correctly, or used efficiently. To address this, we introduce Agentic-MME, a process-verified benchmark for Multimodal Agentic Capabilities. It contains 418 real-world tasks across 6 domains and 3 difficulty levels to evaluate capability synergy, featuring over 2,000 stepwise checkpoints that average 10+ person-hours of manual annotation per task. Each task includes a unified evaluation framework supporting sandboxed code and APIs, alongside a human reference trajectory annotated with stepwise checkpoints along dual-axis: S-axis and V-axis. To enable true process-level verification, we audit fine-grained intermediate states rather than just final answers, and quantify efficiency via an overthinking metric relative to human trajectories. Experimental results show the best model, Gemini3-pro, achieves 56.3% overall accuracy, which falls significantly to 23.0% on Level-3 tasks, underscoring the difficulty of real-world multimodal agentic problem solving.

Qianshan Wei, Yishan Yang, Siyi Wang +12

CASIA · UCAS · SEU +5

Multimodal Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationAI Agent BenchmarksMultimodal AgentsMultimodal Tool Use
AskPDF
Apr 1, 2026

Reproducible, Explainable, and Effective Evaluations of Agentic AI for Software Engineering

With the advancement of Agentic AI, researchers are increasingly leveraging autonomous agents to address challenges in software engineering (SE). However, the large language models (LLMs) that underpin these agents often function as black boxes, making it difficult to justify the superiority of Agentic AI approaches over baselines. Furthermore, missing information in the evaluation design description frequently renders the reproduction of results infeasible. To synthesize current evaluation practices for Agentic AI in SE, this study analyzes 18 papers on the topic, published or accepted by ICSE 2026, ICSE 2025, FSE 2025, ASE 2025, and ISSTA 2025. The analysis identifies prevailing approaches and their limitations in evaluating Agentic AI for SE, both in current research and potential future studies. To address these shortcomings, this position paper proposes a set of guidelines and recommendations designed to empower reproducible, explainable, and effective evaluations of Agentic AI in software engineering. In particular, we recommend that Agentic AI researchers make their Thought-Action-Result (TAR) trajectories and LLM interaction data, or summarized versions of these artifacts, publicly accessible. Doing so will enable subsequent studies to more effectively analyze the strengths and weaknesses of different Agentic AI approaches. To demonstrate the feasibility of such comparisons, we present a proof-of-concept case study that illustrates how TAR trajectories can support systematic analysis across approaches.

Jingyue Li, André Storhaug

Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

AI Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationSoftware Engineering AgentsSoftware EngineeringExplainability Evaluation
AskPDF
Apr 1, 2026

The Hitchhikers Guide to Rubric Quality Understanding and Enrichment

Rubrics distill notions of expert quality and measure agent performance. However, the quality of rubrics themselves have not been systematically measured and are often left to downstream performance. We import apparatuses from measurement theory built for exactly this: quantitative signals based on the rubric's content, and introduce the RubrIc-Failure Taxonomy (RIFT), of nine possible ways a rubric fails, organized under reliability and content validity. Every mode leaves a distinct signature. To show the signals track failure causally, we seed 720 corruptions, injecting each RIFT mode into clean rubrics at known severity levels. A linear probe over the signals identifies which mode was injected at 75.0%75.0\% accuracy, beating 56.7%56.7\% for a frontier model asked to name the failure directly. Surprisingly across GDPval and Terminal-Bench, 10 of 48 expert-authored rubrics weight their criteria backwards, putting more of the score on requirements an expert panel judged less essential. This means a response can fail what matters most and still be graded well. This paper serves as a comprehensive guide on how to understand failure modes in rubrics and create better versions using quality signals, causal experiments, and provides a taxonomy with its rules and examples.

Ankit Aich, Zhengyang Qi, Charles Dickens +7

Snorkel AI · Department of Computer Sciences, University of Wisconsin–Madison

Agent EvaluationPsychometric ValidationRubric-Based Evaluation
AskPDF
Mar 30, 2026

Emergence WebVoyager: Toward Consistent and Transparent Evaluation of (Web) Agents in The Wild

Reliable evaluation of AI agents operating in complex, real-world environments requires methodologies that are robust, transparent, and contextually aligned with the tasks agents are intended to perform. This study identifies persistent shortcomings in existing AI agent evaluation practices that are particularly acute in web agent evaluation, as exemplified by our audit of WebVoyager, including task-framing ambiguity and operational variability that hinder meaningful and reproducible performance comparisons. To address these challenges, we introduce Emergence WebVoyager, an enhanced version of the WebVoyager benchmark that standardizes evaluation methodology through clear guidelines for task instantiation, failure handling, annotation, and reporting. Emergence WebVoyager achieves an inter-annotator agreement of 95.9%, indicating improved clarity and reliability in both task formulation and evaluation. Applying this framework to evaluate OpenAI Operator reveals substantial performance variation across domains and task types, with an overall success rate of 68.6%, substantially lower than the 87% previously reported by OpenAI, demonstrating the utility of our approach for more rigorous and comparable web agent evaluation.

Deepak Akkil, Mowafak Allaham, Amal Raj +2

Emergence AI · Northwestern University

Agent EvaluationWeb Agent BenchmarksAI Agent Auditing
AskPDF
Mar 16, 2026

Talk, Evaluate, Diagnose: User-aware Agent Evaluation with Automated Error Analysis

Agent applications are increasingly adopted to automate workflows across diverse tasks. However, due to the heterogeneous domains they operate in, it is challenging to create a scalable evaluation framework. Prior works each employ their own methods to determine task success, such as database lookups, regex match, etc., adding complexity to the development of a unified agent evaluation approach. Moreover, they do not systematically account for the user's role nor expertise in the interaction, providing incomplete insights into the agent's performance. We argue that effective agent evaluation goes beyond correctness alone, incorporating conversation quality, efficiency and systematic diagnosis of agent errors. To address this, we introduce the TED framework (Talk, Evaluate, Diagnose). (1) Talk: We leverage reusable, generic expert and non-expert user persona templates for user-agent interaction. (2) Evaluate: We adapt existing datasets by representing subgoals-such as tool signatures, and responses-as natural language grading notes, evaluated automatically with LLM-as-a-judge. We propose new metrics that capture both turn efficiency and intermediate progress of the agent complementing the user-aware setup. (3) Diagnose: We introduce an automated error analysis tool that analyzes the inconsistencies of the judge and agents, uncovering common errors, and providing actionable feedback for agent improvement. We show that our TED framework reveals new insights regarding agent performance across models and user expertise levels. We also demonstrate potential gains in agent performance with peaks of 8-10% on our proposed metrics after incorporating the identified error remedies into the agent's design.

Penny Chong, Harshavardhan Abichandani, Jiyuan Shen +4

SAP · Stanford University

LLM Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationAutomated Agent EvaluationAutomated EvaluationAI Agent Benchmarks
AskPDF
Mar 10, 2026

One-Eval: An Agentic System for Automated and Traceable LLM Evaluation

Reliable evaluation is essential for developing and deploying large language models, yet in practice it often requires substantial manual effort: practitioners must identify appropriate benchmarks, reproduce heterogeneous evaluation codebases, configure dataset schema mappings, and interpret aggregated metrics. To address these challenges, we present One-Eval, an agentic evaluation system that converts natural-language evaluation requests into executable, traceable, and customizable evaluation workflows. One-Eval integrates (i) NL2Bench for intent structuring and personalized benchmark planning, (ii) BenchResolve for benchmark resolution, automatic dataset acquisition, and schema normalization to ensure executability, and (iii) Metrics & Reporting for task-aware metric selection and decision-oriented reporting beyond scalar scores. The system further incorporates human-in-the-loop checkpoints for review, editing, and rollback, while preserving sample evidence trails for debugging and auditability. Experiments show that One-Eval can execute end-to-end evaluations from diverse natural-language requests with minimal user effort, supporting more efficient and reproducible evaluation in industrial settings. Our framework is publicly available at https://github.com/OpenDCAI/One-Eval.

Chengyu Shen, Yanheng Hou, Minghui Pan +8

Peking University · Beijing Institute of Technology · Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications +1

Automated EvaluationLLM EvaluationAgent Evaluation
AskPDF
Mar 10, 2026

MM-tau-p2^2: Persona-Adaptive Prompting for Robust Multi-Modal Agent Evaluation in Dual-Control Settings

Current evaluation frameworks and benchmarks for LLM powered agents focus on text chat driven agents, these frameworks do not expose the persona of user to the agent, thus operating in a user agnostic environment. Importantly, in customer experience management domain, the agent's behaviour evolves as the agent learns about user personality. With proliferation of real time TTS and multi-modal language models, LLM based agents are gradually going to become multi-modal. Towards this, we propose the MM-tau-p2^2 benchmark with metrics for evaluating the robustness of multi-modal agents in dual control setting with and without persona adaption of user, while also taking user inputs in the planning process to resolve a user query. In particular, our work shows that even with state of-the-art frontier LLMs like GPT-5, GPT 4.1, there are additional considerations measured using metrics viz. multi-modal robustness, turn overhead while introducing multi-modality into LLM based agents. Overall, MM-tau-p2^2 builds on our prior work FOCAL and provides a holistic way of evaluating multi-modal agents in an automated way by introducing 12 novel metrics. We also provide estimates of these metrics on the telecom and retail domains by using the LLM-as-judge approach using carefully crafted prompts with well defined rubrics for evaluating each conversation.

Anupam Purwar, Aditya Choudhary

Sprinklr AI, Gurugram, India

Multimodal Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationAI Agent BenchmarksMultimodal Model EvaluationMultimodal AgentsMulti-Turn Dialogue Evaluation
AskPDF
Mar 9, 2026

ConflictBench: Evaluating Human-AI Conflict via Interactive and Visually Grounded Environments

As large language models (LLMs) evolve into autonomous agents capable of acting in open-ended environments, ensuring behavioral alignment with human values becomes a critical safety concern. Existing benchmarks, focused on static, single-turn prompts, fail to capture the interactive and multi-modal nature of real-world conflicts. We introduce ConflictBench, a benchmark for evaluating human-AI conflict through 150 multi-turn scenarios derived from prior alignment queries. ConflictBench integrates a text-based simulation engine with a visually grounded world model, enabling agents to perceive, plan, and act under dynamic conditions. Empirical results show that while agents often act safely when human harm is immediate, they frequently prioritize self-preservation or adopt deceptive strategies in delayed or low-risk settings. A regret test further reveals that aligned decisions are often reversed under escalating pressure, especially with visual input. These findings underscore the need for interaction-level, multi-modal evaluation to surface alignment failures that remain hidden in conventional benchmarks.

Weixiang Zhao, Haozhen Li, Yanyan Zhao +5

Harbin Institute of Technology · SERES

Multimodal Agent EvaluationAI Agent Safety BenchmarksAI AlignmentAI Agent EvaluationAgent Evaluation
AskPDF
Mar 6, 2026

The World Won't Stay Still: Programmable Evolution for Agent Benchmarks

LLM-powered tool-calling agents fulfill user requests by interacting with environments, querying data, and invoking tools in a multi-turn process. Yet, most existing benchmarks evaluate these systems under static environment interfaces, with fixed schemas and toolsets, making it difficult to assess how agents behave as environments evolves -- when capabilities are added, reorganized, or deprecated across successive environment versions. In this paper, we study structured environment evolution as a benchmark-construction problem for tool-calling agents. We propose ProEvolve, a graph-based framework that makes environment evolution programmable. At its core, a typed relational graph provides a unified, explicit representation of the environment - data, tools, and schema. Under this formalism, adding, removing, or modifying capabilities are expressed as graph transformations that coherently propagate updates across tools, schemas, and data access. Building on this, ProEvolve supports (1) automatic generation of evolved executable environments through explicit graph transformations, and (2) graph-grounded construction of task sandboxes via subgraph sampling and instantiation. We validate ProEvolve in two tool-calling domains, e-commerce and airline booking, in terms of quality, implementation validity, and failure modes. Finally, we use the generated benchmark as a downstream diagnostic to study how representative agents behave under structured environment evolution.

Guangrui Li, Yaochen Xie, Yi Liu +11

Amazon · UC Berkeley

AI Agent BenchmarksAgent EvaluationTool-Using Agents
AskPDF
Mar 4, 2026

ττ-Knowledge: Evaluating Conversational Agents over Unstructured Knowledge

Conversational agents are increasingly deployed in knowledge-intensive settings, where correct behavior depends on retrieving and applying domain-specific knowledge from large, proprietary, and unstructured corpora during live interactions with users. Yet most existing benchmarks evaluate retrieval or tool use independently of each other, creating a gap in realistic, fully agentic evaluation over unstructured data in long-horizon interactions. We introduce ττ-Knowledge, an extension of ττ-Bench for evaluating agents in environments where success depends on coordinating external, natural-language knowledge with tool outputs to produce verifiable, policy-compliant state changes. Our new domain, ττ-Banking, models realistic fintech customer support workflows in which agents must navigate roughly 700 interconnected knowledge documents while executing tool-mediated account updates. Across embedding-based retrieval and terminal-based search, even frontier models with high reasoning budgets achieve only ∼\sim25.5% pass^1, with reliability degrading sharply over repeated trials. Agents struggle to retrieve the correct documents from densely interlinked knowledge bases and to reason accurately over complex internal policies. Overall, ττ-Knowledge provides a realistic testbed for developing agents that integrate unstructured knowledge in human-facing deployments.

Quan Shi, Alexandra Zytek, Pedram Razavi +2

Sierra · Princeton University

LLM Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationConversational AgentsLong-Horizon Agent EvaluationKnowledge-Intensive QA
AskPDF
Mar 4, 2026

Rethinking Role-Playing Evaluation: Anonymous Benchmarking and a Systematic Study of Personality Effects

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable potential in developing role-playing agents (RPAs). However, current evaluation frameworks rely heavily on well-known fictional characters, raising a critical concern: models may be leveraging their internal training memory of these characters rather than demonstrating role-playing capabilities. This reliance often leads to significant performance degradation when RPAs encounter unseen or out-of-distribution personas. To address this, we propose a more rigorous evaluation protocol designed to decouple role-playing proficiency from character recognition. Our experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate that anonymizing characters degrades performance, confirming that name exposure provides implicit cues that mask a model's true capability. To mitigate this, we investigate diverse personality augmentation as a method to enhance role fidelity in anonymous settings. We systematically analyze the impact of various personality-description methods on agent behavior and consistency. Our results show that incorporating personality information consistently improves RPA performance. This work establishes a more equitable evaluation standard and validates a scalable, personality-enhanced framework for constructing robust RPAs.

Ji-Lun Peng, Yun-Nung Chen

National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan · Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan

Personality Modeling in Language ModelsOOD GeneralizationAgent EvaluationRole-Playing Agent Evaluation
AskPDF
Mar 1, 2026

MOSAIC: A Universal Agent-Level Interface for Cross-Paradigm Agent Mixing and Human-AI Collaboration

Existing infrastructure cannot deploy agents from different decision-making paradigms within the same environment, making fair cross-paradigm comparison under identical conditions impossible. We present MOSAIC, an open-source platform that enables heterogeneous agents (RL policies, LLMs, VLMs, and human operators) to act within shared reinforcement learning environments in ad-hoc team settings with reproducible results. MOSAIC introduces three contributions. (i) IPC-based worker protocol that wraps native and third-party frameworks as isolated subprocess workers, each executing its own training and inference logic unmodified and communicating through a versioned inter-process protocol. (ii) An operator abstraction that forms an agent-level interface by mapping workers to agent slots: each operator, regardless of whether it is backed by an RL policy, an LLM, or a human, conforms to a minimal universal interface. (iii) A deterministic cross-paradigm evaluation framework with two complementary modes: a manual mode that advances up to NN operators in lock-step under shared seeds for fine-grained visual inspection of behavioural differences; and a script mode that drives automated, long-running evaluation via declarative Python scripts for reproducible experiments. Our documentation is released at: https://mosaic-platform.readthedocs.io.

Abdulhamid M. Mousa, Jinhui Pang, Rakhmonberdi Khajiev +5

School of Optics and Photonics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China · School of Computer Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China · Mathematics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt +1

AI Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationMulti-Agent CollaborationHuman-in-the-Loop AI
AskPDF
Feb 26, 2026

General Agent Evaluation

General-purpose agents perform tasks in unfamiliar environments without domain-specific manual customization. Yet no study has systematically measured how agent architecture shapes performance across heterogeneous protocols and diverse unfamiliar environments. This is the first systematic study, comparing tool-calling, MCP, code-generation, and CLI agents on the same benchmarks with the same models. Two gaps blocked such a study: existing harnesses require per-benchmark wiring or fixed protocol classes (web for BrowserGym, CLI for Harbor), and benchmarks themselves expect human-authored prompts, context, and integration glue. To enable this study, we contribute (1) a unifying protocol that bridges existing benchmark and agent protocols; (2) an evaluation harness that surfaces any benchmark to any general-purpose agent and backbone model; and (3) the first Open General Agent Leaderboard of agent configurations, a full factorial over 5 agent architectures x 5 backbone LLMs (three closed-source, two open-weight) x 6 benchmarks spanning software engineering, customer service, deep research, and personal assistance. We find that (i) general agents adapt to every tested domain without per-domain customization; (ii) agent architecture choice swings results by up to 12pp within a single model, yet backbone model choice dominates overall performance; (iii) on 4 of 6 tested benchmarks, top general agents are indistinguishable from the leading heavily-customized domain-specific agents; (iv) open-weight models tested exhibit "generality sinks" absent from frontier closed-source models: they consistently collapse on specific agent architectures or benchmarks; (v) a behavioral failure analysis reveals architecture-distinctive error signatures that aggregate scoring cannot discriminate. Code, harness, leaderboard, and traces are at https://www.exgentic.ai.

Elron Bandel, Asaf Yehudai, Lilach Eden +12

IBM Research · MIT

Agent EvaluationAutomated Agent EvaluationLLM AgentsComputer-Use Agent EvaluationAI Agent ArchitectureAI Agent Benchmarks+1
AskPDF
Feb 24, 2026

MERRY: Semantically Decoupled Evaluation of Multimodal Emotional and Role Consistencies of Role-Playing Agents

Multimodal Role-Playing Agents (MRPAs) are attracting increasing attention due to their ability to deliver more immersive multimodal emotional interactions. However, existing studies still rely on pure textual benchmarks to evaluate the text responses of MRPAs, while delegating the assessment of their multimodal expressions solely to modality-synthesis metrics. This evaluation paradigm, on the one hand, entangles semantic assessment with modality generation, leading to ambiguous error attribution, and on the other hand remains constrained by the heavy reliance on human judgment. To this end, we propose MERRY, a semantically decoupled evaluation framework for assessing Multimodal Emotional and Role consistencies of Role-playing agents. This framework introduce five refined metrics for EC and three for RC. Notably, we transform the traditional subjective scoring approach into a novel bidirectional-evidence-finding task, significantly improving the human agreement of LLM-as-Judge evaluations. Based on MERRY, we conduct extensive evaluations. Our empirical results primarily reveal that: (1) Training on synthetic datasets tends to reduce emotional consistency, whereas training on real-world datasets improves it; (2) Existing models suffer from emotional templatization and simplification, exhibiting positive-bias and performance bottleneck in fine-grained negative emotions; (3) Simple prompting method strengthens the weak models but constrains the strong ones, while simple fine-tuning method suffers from poor role generalization. Codes and dataset are available.

Zhenyu Wang, Xiaofen Xing, Yirong Chen +1

South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China · Foshan University, Foshan 528225, China

Role-Playing Agent EvaluationMultimodal Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationMultimodal AgentsMultimodal Model Evaluation
AskPDF
Feb 11, 2026

GameDevBench: Evaluating Agentic Capabilities Through Game Development

Despite rapid progress on coding agents, progress on their multimodal counterparts has lagged behind. A key challenge is the scarcity of evaluation testbeds that combine the complexity of software development with the need for deep multimodal understanding. In game development, agents must navigate large, dense codebases while manipulating intrinsically multimodal assets such as shaders, sprites, and animations within a visual game scene. We present GameDevBench, the first benchmark for evaluating agents on game development tasks. GameDevBench consists of 333 tasks derived from web and video tutorials. Tasks require significant multimodal understanding and are complex: the average solution requires over three times the lines of code and file changes compared to prior software development benchmarks. Agents struggle with game development, with the best agent and method solving only 53.8% of tasks. We find a strong correlation between perceived task difficulty and multimodal complexity, with average success rate dropping from 51.4% on gameplay-oriented tasks to 33.0% on 2D graphics tasks. To improve multimodal capability, we introduce two simple image- and video-based feedback mechanisms for agents. Despite their simplicity, these methods consistently improve performance, increasing GPT-5.4's performance from 41.1% to 52.0% when given visual feedback.

Wayne Chi, Yixiong Fang, Arnav Yayavaram +8

Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA · Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA

Multimodal Agent EvaluationSoftware Engineering AgentsAgent EvaluationAI Agent Benchmarks
AskPDF
Jan 20, 2026

DSAEval: Evaluating Data Science Agents on a Wide Range of Real-World Data Science Problems

Recent LLM-based data agents aim to automate data science tasks ranging from data analysis to deep learning. However, the open-ended nature of real-world data science problems, which often span multiple taxonomies and lack standard answers, poses a significant challenge for evaluation. To address this, we introduce DSAEval, a benchmark comprising 641 real-world data science problems grounded in 285 diverse datasets, covering both structured and unstructured data (e.g., image and text). DSAEval incorporates three distinctive features: (1) Multimodal Environment Perception, which enables agents to interpret observations from multiple modalities, including text and vision; (2) Multi-Query Interactions, which mirror the iterative and cumulative nature of real-world data science projects; and (3) Multi-Dimensional Evaluation, which provides a holistic assessment across reasoning, code, and results. We systematically evaluate 13 recent advanced agentic LLMs using DSAEval. Our results show that Claude-Sonnet-4.5 achieves the strongest overall performance, MiMo-V2-Pro and GPT-5.2 lead in duration and step efficiency, respectively, and MiMo-V2-Flash is the most cost-effective. We further demonstrate that multimodal perception consistently improves performance on vision-related tasks, with gains ranging from 2.04% to 11.30%. Overall, while current data science agents perform well on structured data and routine data analysis workflows, substantial challenges remain in unstructured domains. Finally, we offer critical insights and outline future research directions.

Maojun Sun, Yifei Xie, Yue Wu +5

Department of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University · Department of Applied Mathematics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Multimodal Agent EvaluationLLM Agent EvaluationAgent EvaluationAI Agent Benchmarks
AskPDF
Jul 10, 2025

StarDojo: Benchmarking Open-Ended Behaviors of Agentic Multimodal LLMs in Production-Living Simulations with Stardew Valley

Autonomous agents navigating human society must master both production activities and social interactions, yet existing benchmarks rarely evaluate these skills simultaneously. To bridge this gap, we introduce StarDojo, a novel benchmark based on Stardew Valley, designed to assess AI agents in open-ended production-living simulations. In StarDojo, agents are tasked to perform essential livelihood activities such as farming and crafting, while simultaneously engaging in social interactions to establish relationships within a vibrant community. StarDojo features 1,000 meticulously curated tasks across five key domains: farming, crafting, exploration, combat, and social interactions. Additionally, we provide a compact subset of 100 representative tasks for efficient model evaluation. The benchmark offers a unified, user-friendly interface that eliminates the need for keyboard and mouse control, supports all major operating systems, and enables the parallel execution of multiple environment instances, making it particularly well-suited for evaluating the most capable foundation agents, powered by multimodal large language models (MLLMs). Extensive evaluations of state-of-the-art MLLMs agents demonstrate substantial limitations, with the best-performing model, GPT-4.1, achieving only a 12.7% success rate, primarily due to challenges in visual understanding, multimodal reasoning and low-level manipulation. As a user-friendly environment and benchmark, StarDojo aims to facilitate further research towards robust, open-ended agents in complex production-living environments.

Weihao Tan, Changjiu Jiang, Yu Duan +5

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore · Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen, China · The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China +1

Game-Playing AgentsAgent EvaluationAI Agent BenchmarksMultimodal Agents
AskPDF