FDE-Gym is a new benchmark that evaluates AI agents on 95 end‑to‑end delivery tasks drawn from real customer scenarios across 18 sectors. Unlike traditional benchmarks that use well‑specified tasks, FDE-Gym places agents in simulated customer environments where they must clarify ambiguous requirements, interact with stakeholders, and uncover unstated constraints to improve a customer’s success metric. In tests, the best model configuration achieved a mean score of 0.56 and solved only 14 of the 95 tasks, highlighting a significant gap between well‑specified problem solving and real‑world AI delivery.
By Dongxu Yang, Hongda Yan, Renxin Wang, Baoli Zhang, Haojia Zuo, Ying Zhao, Youmin Chen, Xiaojian Liao, Congming Gao, Tianyang Jiang, Yixiao Chen, Qing Wang, Zhiguo Yu, Xiaqing Li, Yuhao Zhang, Jiawen Sun, Renzhe Xu, De Mi, Tiancheng Wu, Xianya Fu, Xuanlu Zhao, Bo Feng, Meixuan Ren, Guanming Lin, Ziheng Zhou, Xinhua Wang
The paper investigates whether large language model (LLM) coding agents can function as forward‑deployed engineer (FDE) agents by discovering customer requirements and executing deployment plans in a real enterprise text‑to‑SQL scenario. In a simulated engagement, agents must uncover acceptance criteria, data permissions, and hardware constraints before planning and delivering a post‑training recipe. Across 15 models, the best agents uncovered over 80% of hidden requirements, yet only 25% of runs met all acceptance criteria, revealing bottlenecks in discovery, execution reliability, compute usage, and benchmark relevance.
By Marianne Menglin Liu, Rongguang Wang, Zheng Wang, Yewen Wang, Leonid Boytsov, Tao Sheng, Sujith Ravi, Dan Roth
EvalResearchBench (ERB) is a benchmark that tests whether AI agents can autonomously design evaluation tasks for recursive self‑improvement. In ERB, a researcher agent selects or synthesizes tasks, builds graders, and refines them through pilot tests before producing a final evaluator that runs within fixed time and API budgets. Experiments with nine researchers and thirteen candidate models show that the best automated evaluators achieve about 75% concordance with target benchmarks, below the 91% ceiling set by target disagreements, and that human‑designed task samples still outperform many automated approaches.
By Yaolun Zhang, Tianyi Xu, Yujie Zhao, Jishen Zhao, Qingyun Wu, Huazheng Wang
arXiv:2607. 20468v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents are increasingly used to automate research and development tasks, yet existing benchmarks typically evaluate them on prescribed workflows or narrow action spaces.
By Jehyeok Yeon, Ben Rank, Maksym Andriushchenko
CRM‑Agent‑Bench is a benchmark that evaluates language agents in customer‑relationship‑management settings by testing 555 stateful, multi‑turn tasks across nine business domains. Each task includes an executable contract with checks on actions, arguments, order, responses, target state, and protected state, and success requires meeting all these checks. The benchmark reports coverage, latency, and cost, showing that evaluated systems achieve 64.32%–83.60% strict success while varying in cost and domain reliability.
By Monojit Banerjee, Zhujun Lan, Defu Cao
Agent4RE is a self‑refining multi‑agent framework designed for end‑to‑end software requirements engineering (RE). It coordinates specialized agents and includes two iterative improvement loops, and introduces a new real‑world dataset, RE‑E2E, for evaluating RE workflows from elicitation to generation. The framework, along with two enhanced variants that use autonomous self‑refinement or structured human feedback, consistently outperforms baseline prompting methods across eight large language models, achieving higher text‑based metrics and superior human and LLM‑as‑a‑judge ratings.
By Yongjian Tang, Linhan Li, Thomas Runkler
The paper introduces $ au^ au$-Bench, a benchmark that turns the construction of AI agents into a measurable task. In this environment a developer agent receives real business records, client requirements, a production API, an existing codebase, and constraints on cost and models, and must deliver a complete customer‑service agent. The benchmark evaluates performance by deploying the agent against simulated users, revealing that current state‑of‑the‑art models achieve only 23.9% success while an expert‑written reference scores 82.2%.
By Quan Shi, Keshav Dhandhania, Karthik Narasimhan, Victor Barres
AgentSWE is a new benchmark for agent software engineering that evaluates coding agents across three lifecycle stages: creating an agent from a natural‑language requirement, editing existing agent codebases, and optimizing toward a measurable target. The benchmark consists of 25 commission‑style tasks, where builders iterate on a few illustrative cases and are then tested on held‑out cases that cover the full requirement, with hard pass/fail gates or objective‑based grading. Experiments show that current coding agents fail to meet the requirements, revealing common failure modes such as overfitting, incomplete runtimes, and unsupported completion claims.
By Jiahao Wang, Hongjin Qian, Yuyang Hu, Jiajun Zhang, Zheng Liu
arXiv:2607. 23123v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing evaluations of large language models cover knowledge, reasoning, coding, and tool use, but they rarely treat a verifiable deliverable produced within a constrained workflow as the unit of evaluation.
By Summer Sun (Shaqiu Community)
arXiv:2609.37658v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: LLM agents are increasingly expected to support enterprise workflows, where tasks often involve missing information, uncertainty, feedback, and long-te...
By Min Yang, Yichen Pan, Jinghua Piao, Dandan Song, Yongshun Gong, Yong Li
EGI‑BENCH is a unified benchmark suite for evaluating large language model agents in enterprise settings, consolidating eight existing benchmarks (CRMARENA, HERB, PERSONABENCH, USERBENCH, MCP‑UNIVERSE, MCPEVAL, BENCHFORCE, LOCOBENCH) under a single command‑line interface with two runtime‑budgeted modes. It introduces the Enterprise General Intelligence (EGI) Score, a six‑dimensional framework (M1‑M6) that aggregates fine‑grained sub‑metrics from each benchmark rather than simple averages, providing a more nuanced view of model capabilities. The paper reports results for fourteen LLMs across GPT, Claude, and Gemini families, showing varied strengths across task outcome, planning, retrieval, tool actioning, safety, and engineering quality.
By Zhiwei Liu, Zhujun Lan, Jielin Qiu, Zixiang Chen, Liangwei Yang, Ming Zhu, Akshara Prabhakar, Wenting Zhao, John Emmons, Jason Wu, Shafiq Rayhan Joty, Junnan Li, Shelby Heinecke, Silvio Savarese, Huan Wang
arXiv:2606. 21140v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Rapid advances in large language models have improved the task-solving capabilities of command-line-interface (CLI)-based agents, whose CLIs determine how models invoke tools, maintain interaction history, and recover from failures.
By Han Chi, Jiaxin Qi, Yan Cui, Baisheng Lai, Jianqiang Huang