LLM Agent Reliability

Spreadsheet agents are converging on elaborate multi-agent designs, yet it is unclear how much of their performance comes from the agents rather than from the action interface they share. We answer this with SheetMind, a Manager-Action-Reflection framework, in a controlled study over all 221 tasks of the SheetCopilot Benchmark: five architectural variants, four backbones, exact McNemar tests on paired outcomes, and a checker reproducing the official chart and pivot comparisons. Replacing the high-level action API with primitive cell operations costs 47.1 points (p < 0.0001) and leaves the agent below a do-nothing baseline, whereas both extra agents together are worth 3.2 points: the Reflection Agent adds +4.5 (p = 0.013), the Manager +1.4 (p = 0.68). Decomposition instead changes how the system fails, cutting silently wrong outputs from 33% to 25% of tasks (p = 0.010). Capability saturates: GPT-5 and the five-times-cheaper GPT-5-mini are not significantly different (61.1% vs. 58.4%, p = 0.15), while GPT-3.5 loses 16.3 points and fails differently. A reflector must judge the step it just took, not the subtask. SheetMind reaches 61.1% Pass@1 with GPT-5 on the full SCB-221, against a do-nothing baseline of 9.0%. Accuracy comes from the operations an agent can name; the agents decide how it fails.

Many fear that future artificial agents will resist shutdown. I present an idea - the POST-Agents Proposal - for ensuring that doesn't happen. I propose that we train agents to satisfy Preferences Only Between Same-Length Trajectories (POST). I then prove that POST - together with other conditions - implies Neutrality+: the agent maximizes expected utility, ignoring the probability distribution over trajectory-lengths. I argue that Neutrality+ keeps agents shutdownable and allows them to be useful.

Workflows in drug-target interaction (DTI) assessment require integrating heterogeneous data from predictive models, curated resources, and observations from experimental literature. This evidence can be incomplete or conflicting. DrugAgent is a large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent system focused on DTI evidence integration that integrates outputs from machine learning, knowledge graph, and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) agents. DrugAgent converts agent outputs into interpretable representations, then summarizes conflict across the evidence. We evaluated DrugAgent on kinase screening data of 900 pairs spanning 178 kinases and 42 inhibitors, and an androgen receptor antagonist screening benchmark. On the kinase dataset, LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation indicated outputs were faithful to input evidence in 98.8% of cases. Biological plausibility of returned summarization was high (scores 3-4 out of 5) across ground-truth classes: 79% of Weak activity labels cases (81% for Moderate/77% Strong); Strong cases received higher scores than Weak/Moderate. Label stability showed 98% agreement across runs. Results on the antagonist benchmark were consistent with the kinase dataset. Retrieved literature provided the greatest benefit when direct drug-target evidence was available, highlighting the importance of evidence availability for RAG-based integration. DrugAgent provides heterogeneous evidence-grounded DTI assessment, complementing standalone DTI prediction. We provide strategies to model agreement, conflict, and uncertainty in biomedical evidence integration. Code: https://github.com/sciluna/DrugAgent.