AgentCheck: A Reproduce-Intervene-Mitigate Workbench for LLM Agents over MCP
arXiv:2607. 11098v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using LLM agents are mostly evaluated assuming all tools work.
arXiv:2607. 11098v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using LLM agents are mostly evaluated assuming all tools work.
arXiv:2606. 05339v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: MCP (Model Context Protocol) enables LLMs (Large Language Models) to interact with external tools and data sources via a standardized protocol.
The study investigates why small language model agents tend to repeat a tool call that just failed. By recording the failed call and its error message in the transcript, the authors measure a negative corrective gain—agents are more likely to repeat the failed action, with a drop of about 1.03 nats per token. The problem is traced to the harness design rather than the model’s understanding of errors, and the authors show that replacing the verbatim call with a runtime-generated description of the failure can reduce this backfiring effect by 76%.
arXiv:2606. 29073v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Model Context Protocol (MCP)-style ecosystems give language-model applications a practical connection layer for tools, resources, prompts, and transports.
The study examines the composition of a random sample from the Model Context Protocol (MCP) registry, revealing that only 48.8% of the 400 sampled npm/stdio servers successfully complete an initialization handshake, compared to 66.7% for a hand‑curated frame. Among the servers that run, there are no fatal JSON Schema violations across 2,766 advertised tools, but optional safety annotations vary widely, with a 58.8% omission rate in the random draw versus 41.5% in the curated set. The authors also compare MCP tool descriptions to two benchmark corpora, finding minimal near‑duplication in real MCP tools (2.8%) and significant repetition in synthetic datasets (up to 85.6%).
arXiv:2609.26048v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language-model agents often reach a working solution and then fail to consistently deliver it. We study runtime policies: targeted natural-language i...
Software engineering (SWE) agents resolve repository-level issues through long trajectories that grow increasingly expensive as context accumulates. Failed runs tend to be longer and exhibit redundant exploration or looping, suggesting that some failures may be detectable before completion.
arXiv:2607. 09510v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) coding agents are increasingly deployed to autonomously perform software engineering tasks in terminal-based environments, making their reliability a growing concern.
arXiv:2608. 19741v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent agent benchmarks increasingly ground evaluation in executable environments, from code repair to web navigation, app APIs, and function calling.
arXiv:2608. 03222v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software engineering (SWE) agents resolve repository-level issues through long trajectories that grow increasingly expensive as context accumulates.
arXiv:2607. 20531v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: 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.
arXiv:2609.26693v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A coding agent must emit a valid tool call--a parseable invocation of a tool in the provided schema--before the harness can execute its chosen action....