Rethinking the Evaluation of Harness Evolution for Agents
arXiv:2607. 12227v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We revisit the evaluation of automatic harness evolution for LLM agents.
Mid‑Harness proposes a test‑time compute strategy that samples and verifies candidate actions before execution, keeping the underlying generator and harness unchanged. Experiments show that with a strong verifier, sampling more actions significantly boosts success rates—e.g., a GPT‑5.6 verifier raises Pass@1 from 50.00 % to 68.03 % on TerminalBench‑Lite using eight samples. The approach also improves performance across various models, benchmarks, and harnesses, demonstrating that action scaling is a promising target for enhancing terminal agent reliability.
arXiv:2607. 12227v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We revisit the evaluation of automatic harness evolution for LLM agents.
The paper introduces a coroutine-bridge harness that lets a language model emit a Python program to manage tool calls in the CAR-bench evaluation. By decoupling model invocations from tool round-trips, the approach reduces model calls to a median of two per task while maintaining seven agent turns, achieving a median latency of 1.8 s on a Cerebras gpt‑oss‑120b. The harness achieved 60.0 % Pass³ on the official hidden evaluation, outperforming the baseline by 4.5× and matching frontier-model agents on GPT‑5.5, all while keeping the prompt largely cached and minimizing input compute.
arXiv:2607. 22585v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Public leaderboards for coding agents typically rank systems by model name and pass rate, while the surrounding harness (the scaffold that issues tools, manages context, and decides when to stop) is often under-specified.
The paper reports that applying reinforcement learning (RL) to the Kimi K2.7 Code model on 1,700 agentic coding tasks improves its performance on six external benchmarks. After a single epoch of GSPO training on a rank‑32 LoRA adapter, pass‑@1 scores increased across all benchmarks, with significant gains even on data released after training. The trained model also reduces agent steps and avoids common failure modes such as dropping requirements or breaking existing behavior.
JIT‑Agent is a model that automatically generates task‑adaptive agent harnesses for any off‑the‑shelf LLM, replacing manual, task‑specific harness design. It learns to compose, repair, and evolve harnesses using a fixed four‑module protocol, and its use boosts performance on benchmarks such as DeepSearchQA and OdysseyBench, outperforming several mature agent runtimes. The approach demonstrates that harness intelligence can be trained, transferred, and compounded independently of model scaling.
arXiv:2608. 05466v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: High-quality long-horizon training data for terminal agents is expensive to produce, often costing hundreds to thousands of dollars per task, because each task must keep the instruction, environment, reference solution, and verifier mutually consistent.
arXiv:2606. 17546v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-evolving LLM-based agents improve mainly by changing their agent harness: the structured execution layer around a base model, including prompts, memory, tools, middleware, runtime state, and the model-tool interaction loop.
arXiv:2607. 08124v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The behavior of an LLM agent is determined not only by the underlying model, but also by its harness: the executable program that constructs context, invokes tools, verifies intermediate results, and recovers from failures.
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.
arXiv:2608. 15089v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-horizon agents can fail even when their underlying models can solve the constituent steps.
arXiv:2606. 17454v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agent performance is not just a modeling problem, it is fundamentally a systems problem.
arXiv:2607. 04528v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Software-agent benchmarks usually report whether an agent solves a task, but the agent reaches that outcome through a harness that controls what it sees, which actions it can take, which failures are repaired, which states are verified, and which evidence is logged.