CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AI2026-07-14

How Many Tasks Are Enough for Agent Benchmark Decisions? A Replay Analysis of Public LLM Agent Benchmarks

Wei-Jung Huang

Agent benchmarks often compare two agents after all tasks have run, but costly evaluations make partial runs tempting. A task fraction alone does not show whether a partial run supports the same pairwise conclusion as the completed benchmark. We study this question by replaying completed public task-level records from SWE-bench, AppWorld, and tau-bench. A partial budget counts as enough only when it supports the completed benchmark's decision, covers required task groups, and leaves no more than a target fraction of comparisons unresolved. The required task fraction varies sharply. At the strict 0 percentage point threshold on a 5 percentage point budget grid, AppWorld first meets all targets at 15 percent, tau-bench at 25 percent, and SWE-bench Verified at 90 percent; SWE-bench Lite does not meet all targets by 95 percent under the primary coverage rule. Partial-evaluation reports should state how much one agent must outperform another, how tasks are selected, what coverage rule is required, what decision rule is used, and how many comparisons may remain unresolved.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.CRcs.AIcs.LG2026-07-20

Adaptive Adversaries: A Multi-Turn, Multi-LLM Benchmark for LLM Agent Security

Devina Jain, David Hartmann, Chuan Li

LLM-based agents process external content, exposing them to prompt injection and multi-turn manipulation. Most safety benchmarks evaluate defenders against fixed attack pools collected before evaluation, single-turn or multi-turn. We present a 21-scenario benchmark for \emph{adap…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AI2026-07-10

DynamicMCPBench: A Trace-Grounded, Effect-Scored Benchmark for LLM Agents over Live MCP Servers

Jerzy Kamiński, Ilya Galyukshev, Artem Kuznetsov, Sergey Chuprin, Kirill Redko, Aidar Shumbalov, et al.

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed over Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, yet the benchmarks used to evaluate them score the final answer or a fixed "ground-truth" list of tools, both of which are fragile once the underlying data is live and stateful.…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AIcs.SE2026-07-16

MCPEvol-Bench: Benchmarking LLM Agent Performance Across Dynamic Evolutions of MCP Servers

Huanxi Liu, Kun Hu, Jiaqi Liao, Qiang Wang, Pengfei Qian, YuanZhao Zhai, et al.

As Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers emerge as the core infrastructure for connecting LLMs with external tools, existing benchmarks leverage real-world MCP servers to evaluate LLM agents' tool-using capabilities. However, these benchmarks overlook the continuous evolution of t…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AIcs.CL2026-07-07

PolyWorkBench: Benchmarking Multilingual Long-Horizon LLM Agents

Hongliang Li, Yijin Liu, Zhiwei Zhang, Zihe Liu, Xinyue Lou, Jinan Xu, et al.

Large language model (LLM) agents have shown strong performance in long-horizon tasks that require planning, tool use, and interaction with external environments. However, most existing benchmarks implicitly assume a monolingual setting, where the entire execution process, includ…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CLcs.AIcs.LGstat.ML2026-07-05

CausalGame: Benchmarking Causal Thinking of LLM Agents in Games

Zhenhao Chen, Yongqiang Chen, Chenxi Liu, Junchi Yu, Xiangchen Song, Zijian Li, et al.

Building AI Scientist agents with Large Language Models (LLMs) has recently attracted growing attention. Since scientific discovery fundamentally relies on uncovering causal relationships from observations, the capability of causal thinking, i.e., distinguishing causation from co…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AI2026-06-28

A Multi-Dataset Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents in Microservice Failure Diagnosis

Yuanhong Cai, Xiaohui Nie, Kanglin Yin, Changhua Pei, Yongqian Sun, Shenglin Zhang, et al.

LLM-based agents are reshaping microservice operations into AgentOps, where benchmarks are key to evaluating failure diagnosis over multimodal observability data. However, existing benchmarks remain largely outcome-oriented: they score only the final answer and fail to assess the…

View free PDFSource page