arXiv:2607. 13285v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The capability of a modern AI agent depends not only on its foundation model but also on its harness, which constructs prompts, manages state, invokes tools, and coordinates execution.
arXiv:2606. 14249v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agent performance depends critically on the runtime harness, comprising the prompts, tools, memory, and control flow that mediate how a model observes, reasons, and acts.
arXiv:2609.14857v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent work extends recursive self-improvement (RSI) to agent harnesses for long-horizon coding and terminal tasks, enabling agents to improve executio...
The paper introduces Harness Primitives—reusable agent harness mechanisms mined from failed task trajectories—and a framework called STITCH that selects and composes these primitives into task‑specific harnesses at test time. This approach avoids generating or debugging harness code for each task, achieving up to 12‑point gains in task success over fixed harness baselines and outperforming human‑designed harnesses like Codex CLI. STITCH also demonstrates minimal test‑time overhead (2.7%) and scales efficiently with the size of the primitive library.
arXiv:2608. 04968v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The capabilities of an LLM agent depend not only on its model but on the harness: the executable program that constructs context, invokes tools, verifies results, and recovers from failure.
arXiv:2606. 03907v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic AI coding tools write code with increasing autonomy and in doing so decide when to import a library and when to implement functionality from scratch.
arXiv:2602. 22480v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: An important emerging application of coding agents is agent harness optimization: the iterative improvement of a target agent by editing and evaluating its code.
arXiv:2607. 18161v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Coding agents are increasingly used to accelerate code generation in many downstream tasks, such as fixing bugs, building applications, and prototyping.
arXiv:2607. 14159v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: An agent harness is the external control layer that turns a base LLM into an executable agent by managing context, tools, orchestration, memory, decoding, and output handling.
The study investigates how individual components of a coding harness—planning, action space, and context management—affect autonomous coding agents’ performance. By fixing the execution loop and varying these components across 176 settings on SWE‑Bench Verified and Terminal‑Bench 2.1, the authors find that context management is most valuable when context windows are tight, staging rule‑based elision before LLM summarization yields the best efficiency, planning serves as an accuracy scaffold for weaker models and a cost saver for stronger ones, and predefined tools help models with limited bash skills while bash‑capable models benefit from a bash‑only interface. Trajectory‑level analysis shows that context management lengthens execution paths, planning alters where trajectories terminate, and the action space determines code granularity, offering a modular framework for future harness design.
arXiv:2609.40330v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Automating the search for effective harnesses is an important step toward enabling agents to recursively self-improve. Existing harness optimizations t...
The paper introduces a self‑evolving harness framework where a frozen language‑model agent first solves tasks and then edits its own harness based on run records. Using a 49‑line seed harness, the evolved harness improves average scores on in‑distribution benchmarks by 4.48 points and on out‑of‑distribution benchmarks by 12.64 points, surpassing Codex on the former and matching it on the latter. Continued evolution on a specific out‑of‑distribution benchmark further raises performance, and the study analyzes emergent mechanisms such as output truncation and history compaction.
The paper introduces HarnessLens, a budget‑aware framework that evolves language‑model agent harnesses by jointly exploring task spaces and user‑configurable components. It derives candidate modifications from execution trajectories and selectively verifies them on behavior‑relevant tasks using an attributable‑evidence gate, thereby avoiding wasteful rollouts on unrelated behaviors. Experiments on three harnesses and four benchmarks show that HarnessLens improves held‑out performance by 7.6‑13.6% while using less evaluation budget than existing methods.