arXiv:2606. 05872v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents are commonly evaluated using task success, reward, latency, and cost.
AI agents are commonly evaluated using task success, reward, latency, and cost. These metrics are useful, but they often miss important aspects of agent behavior: whether an agent explores too much, repeats itself too rigidly, uses tools effectively, reduces uncertainty over time, or remains robust across repeated runs.
AuditKIT is a source‑available evaluation library that unifies benchmark accuracy, judge‑based assessment, runtime performance, tool‑use behavior, and retrieval quality into a single result representation. It offers direction‑aware metric contracts, configuration fingerprints, and extensible metrics and backends, while providing turn‑aware tool‑call matching and distinguishing verified task outcomes from trajectory‑level diagnostics. Seven case studies demonstrate how answer extraction, runtime behavior, and metric selection can alter evaluation outcomes across model comparison, serving runtimes, retrieval, tool calling, and interoperability.
arXiv:2602. 16666v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI agents are increasingly deployed to execute important tasks.
AgentTune is a source‑available Python library that offers a unified training lifecycle for tool‑using large language model agents. It introduces a two‑tier EventLog representation to preserve agent trajectories and enable consistent training, evaluation, and auditing. The framework supplies a shared runtime, reinforcement learning for tool‑calling, agentic distillation, retrieval‑augmented generation, decision workflows, evaluation utilities, and a path toward self‑healing agents, all exposed through composable interfaces for flexible combination of strategies and methods.
The article "Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks" surveys the lack of a standard definition for AI agents and organizes this ambiguity into five dimensions: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal‑directed behavior, and temporal coherence. It reviews how each dimension has been conceptualized in prior work and compiles the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess them. The authors also introduce the Agent Compendium, a public digital resource that extends these evaluation methods, aiming to provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems.
arXiv:2602.02475v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI agents often fail in ways that are difficult to localize because executions are probabilistic, long-horizon, multi-agent, and mediated by noisy...
arXiv:2602. 04234v6 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent systems (MAS) have emerged as a prominent paradigm for leveraging large language models (LLMs) to tackle complex tasks.
The paper introduces TraceTrial-Bench, a benchmark that evaluates the reliability of AI agent harnesses across seven components—context, execution, governance, lifecycle, observability, tools, and verification—using 95 expert-level tasks with executable or state-based ground truth. It employs a Trajectory Tracing module to record agent execution, a two-layer evaluation framework to separately assess agent performance and harness reliability, and a Multi-source Evidence Acquisition module to gather evidence for LLM-based evaluation. The benchmark’s analysis of 3,420 runs across four harnesses and nine models shows harness scores between 59.8% and 72.0%, with 31.1% of runs succeeding despite failing at least one harness criterion, highlighting the need for auditable and reproducible harness evaluation.
The paper argues that artificial agentic systems, which operate as behavioral systems by interacting with dynamic environments, pursuing goals, and adapting over time, should be evaluated through systematic observation, perturbation, and interpretation of their actions rather than solely on performance outcomes. It draws on lessons from behavioral sciences to motivate this position and proposes a research agenda that includes methods for recovering decision strategies from action sequences, constructing environments that isolate behavioral differences, and probing emergent dynamics in multi‑agent systems. These directions aim to establish a rigorous science of AI behavior.
arXiv:2607. 25904v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Graphical user interface task evaluation aims to determine whether a GUI agent has successfully completed a user instruction.
arXiv:2606. 01725v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic AI completes tasks through iterative planning, tool use, and reasoning based on observed outcomes.
arXiv:2606. 29026v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent AI systems can improve answer selection by allowing different language models to exchange reasoning traces, revise initial predictions, and support a final decision.