The paper introduces CHART, a curriculum that rotates harnesses during training to teach search agents parallel search strategies robustly across different harness configurations. Unlike static harness augmentation, CHART gradually consolidates behavior by graduating learned harnesses and replacing them, maintaining a reward gap that drives learning. Experiments show CHART enables agents to parallelize on 89% of held‑out harnesses, improves performance on a new QA task by 5.6pp, and benefits more from meta‑harness search than baselines.
arXiv:2609.24974v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agent harnesses, the external systems that mediate model-environment interaction, can substantially improve agent performance, but their gains remain...
The paper introduces WHALE, a method that alternates between updating a language model’s weights and searching for a better harness (the code that manages context and control flow). By iteratively fine‑tuning the model under the current harness and then optimizing the harness under the updated model, WHALE improves performance across search QA, math reasoning, and chess puzzles, outperforming weight‑only, harness‑only, and Fast‑Slow Training by 4.15–24.38 percentage points in mean@8 accuracy. The approach uses either fixed phase lengths or an adaptive patience rule to decide when to switch phases, and the authors provide code on GitHub.
EVOHARNESSBENCH is a new benchmark that tests how LLM-based agents handle changes in their tool, skill, and agent harnesses over time. It includes 17 deterministic harness streams with 802 tasks, 520 tools, 42 skills, and 62 agents, and evaluates agents in two settings: deployment evaluation and self‑evolving adaptation evaluation. The study finds that harness expansion can cause forgetting, adaptation gains are inconsistent, and preserving old competence does not always aid new capability adaptation, highlighting harness evolution as a distinct challenge for agent development.
arXiv:2609.04280v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Modern LLM-based agents operate through a harness of tools, reusable skills, and specialist agents that shapes what they observe and what the...
arXiv:2609.13739v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language-model agents are increasingly deployed through diverse harnesses that differ in system prompts, tool schemas, control loops, and trajectory...
arXiv:2607. 26598v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents may recover from a failure within an episode or after a retry, yet the same execution failure can recur in later tasks because post-episode feedback rarely revises the persistent harness that guides future interactions.
arXiv:2609.09134v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent harnesses (the system prompt, tool set, execution hooks, and context-management scaffolding around a model) are a critical determinant of agentic...
arXiv:2608. 08466v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Modern LLM agents are often improved by modifying prompts, tools, or workflows manually, while the executable scaffold surrounding the model---the \emph{harness}---is typically treated as a fixed artifact after deployment.
The study investigates how multi‑harness reinforcement learning (RL) affects coding agents by comparing two grouping strategies—Within (one group per task‑harness pair) and Cross (harnesses pooled within a task)—using a Qwen3‑8B policy trained on frozen task‑harness records from Aider, OpenHands, Qwen Code, and SWE‑agent. Across 24,000 sealed evaluations, the choice of evaluation harness dramatically increases solve rates (from 2.14 % to 9.27 %), while the grouping rule has a negligible effect. Both grouping rules yield similar gains on the same source harness, and Cross‑harness credit does not improve portability beyond Within‑harness credit, suggesting that multi‑harness RL reports should specify grouping boundaries and test on unseen harnesses.
arXiv:2609. 37968v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Advances in the coding capabilities of LLM agents allow them to inspect and modify their own instructions, tools, and execution procedures.
arXiv:2608. 07545v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: An LLM agent's capability depends not only on model weights but on its harness: prompts, tools, skills, and control flow.
arXiv:2607. 12227v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We revisit the evaluation of automatic harness evolution for LLM agents.