AgentEval is a system that tracks a contract-bound assessment record throughout a stateful agent’s tool execution, capturing state, events, and evidence to determine whether obligations are satisfied, violated, or unresolved. In 32 tool‑world administrations, independent checks confirmed all 30 complete episodes, while controlled interventions on 48 evidence views uncovered 36 binding faults that hash‑only checks missed. A public‑benchmark study on 192 held‑out executions identified ten completed subgoals within broader task failures and highlighted the impact of missing evidence on overall task success.
By Ruiqi Gao (Alibaba Cloud, Alibaba Group)
The paper introduces SARA, a framework that separates action induction from runtime authorization in tool‑augmented LLM agents. By treating these as distinct roles, SARA uses an Action Probe to record action provenance and only authorizes tool calls that align with the user objective and past successful executions. Experiments on AgentDojo and AgentDyn show that SARA reduces action‑to‑side‑effect risk to below 0.63% while preserving task performance.
By Xiaokun Guo, Zhen Xu, Dongdong Huo, Yanqiu Zhang, Wei Wang, Qinfu Yang, Dongjin Yu, Yu Wang
arXiv:2608. 12761v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic workflows are commonly evaluated by whether they reach the correct outcome.
By Jesus Salas
LEDGER is a tracing and review system for large language model agents that constructs layered trace graphs from observed sessions. It groups raw trace records into Evidence Nodes and Workflow Nodes, anchors artifacts as evidence, and adds typed semantic edges linking claims to supporting actions, artifacts, and checks. The resulting traces reveal workflow decisions, artifact lineage, repair steps, validation coverage, and claim‑support paths for evidence‑centered audit.
By Daehong Kim, Haichao Miao, Shusen Liu
arXiv:2606. 04990v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents increasingly solve complex tasks by interacting with external tools, retrieval systems, memory modules, environments, and other agents.
By Yiqi Wang, Jiaqi Zhang, Taotao Cai, Zirui Liu, Qingqiang Sun, Zequn Sun, Zhangkai Wu, Mingkai Zhang, Yanming Zhu
arXiv:2606. 30531v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-augmented language-model agents are often evaluated by whether they select the correct tool, produce valid API arguments, and complete the requested task.
By Rahul Suresh Babu, Shashank Indukuri
arXiv:2606. 02965v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As large language models gain tool access and are deployed as autonomous agents capable of editing records, executing transactions, and modifying infrastructure, we still evaluate them based on the sole metric of task completion.
By Victor Ojewale, Suresh Venkatasubramanian
ContrAgent is a contract‑based framework that provides symbolic temporal supervision for large language model agents. It records an agent’s tool‑call sequence as a trace of checkable predicates and formalizes desired behaviors with assume‑guarantee contracts expressed in linear temporal logic over finite traces (LTLf). Each contract is compiled into a deterministic finite automaton that both gates actions online and evaluates recorded traces offline, enabling deterministic, reproducible verdicts and significantly lower per‑call latency compared to existing LLM‑judge and rule‑based guardrail baselines.
By Yifeng Xiao, Pierluigi Nuzzo
arXiv:2606. 04104v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agent systems execute through runtimes with very different control points: local coding tools, framework SDKs, managed agent platforms, API gateways, and observer-only integrations.
By Zexun Wang
Harness-Bench is a diagnostic benchmark that evaluates how different harness configurations affect LLM agent performance in realistic workflows. It tests 106 sandboxed offline tasks across multiple model backends, recording artifacts, execution traces, and usage statistics to analyze completion, process quality, efficiency, and failure behavior. The study finds significant variation in outcomes across model-harness pairings, indicating that agent capability should be reported at the configuration level rather than solely by the base model.
By Yilun Yao, Xinyu Tan, Chao-Hsuan Liu, Yaoming Li, Zhengyang Wang, Zongwei Lv, Wenhan Yu, Zhewen Tan, Yuxuan Tian, Lin Sun, Xiangzheng Zhang, Guangxiang Zhao, Tong Yang
arXiv:2610.16117v2 Announce Type: new
Abstract: LLM-based multi-agent collaboration is increasingly used to solve complex tasks by dividing work among specialized agents and integrating complementary...
By Chen Huang, Yiyang Zhang, Yuhao Wu, Yang Deng, Wenxuan Zhang
arXiv:2606. 04990v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents are evolving from passive text generators into autonomous systems capable of planning, tool use, retrieval, memory access, environmental interaction, and multi-agent collaboration.
By Yiqi Wang, Jiaqi Zhang, Taotao Cai, Zirui Liu, Qingqiang Sun, Zequn Sun, Zhangkai Wu, Manqing Dong, Mingkai Zhang, Xuefei Yin, Yanming Zhu