arXiv AI
MS-Eval: Benchmarking Sub-Agent Delegation and Orchestration in MCP-Intensive Working Scenarios
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Jul 29
OrchBench: Evaluating Multi-Agent Orchestration Plans in Isolation via Deterministic Simulation
arXiv:2607. 25656v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Complex tasks often decompose into parallelizable yet interdependent subtasks, making orchestration critical to the performance of multi-agent systems (MAS).
arXiv AI
Sep 2
UniACE: A Unified Framework for Evaluating LLM Agentic Capabilities
UniACE is a unified framework that standardizes the evaluation of large language model (LLM) agents by representing each benchmark as an instruction–tool–environment triplet and running models through a shared, task‑agnostic harness in isolated runtimes. It preserves native success criteria, offers an offline mode for dynamic‑resource tasks, and standardizes efficiency metrics, execution records, and failure attribution. Applying UniACE to 7 benchmarks across 24 domains and 15 models revealed significant score shifts, ranking reversals, and sensitivity to evidence representation, highlighting the impact of evaluation configuration on reported agent performance.
arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 12
Proactive Agentic Orchestration
The paper introduces POrchestra, a proactive agentic orchestration framework that lets sub‑agents request harness adjustments during execution, enhancing adaptability to dynamic environments. It also proposes On‑Policy Orchestration Distillation (OPOD), which uses hindsight feedback from sub‑agents’ requests to provide targeted improvement signals for training the orchestration policy. Experiments on three long‑horizon benchmarks show that POrchestra boosts task success by about 9.1% over the best baseline, and with OPOD the improvement rises to 10.0%, while also improving cost‑performance trade‑offs.
arXiv AI
Aug 26
PeakBench: Benchmarking Resource-Aware Tool Invocation in LLM Agents
PeakBench is a new benchmark designed to evaluate how large language model agents invoke multiple tools while respecting resource constraints and parallel execution. It provides executable multi‑tool workflows with dependency annotations and measured resource profiles, and introduces a two‑part evaluation framework that separates logical planning from physical scheduling. The study shows that strong logical planning alone does not guarantee safe or efficient execution, and that providing resource information can reduce overflows and improve utilization.
arXiv AI
Oct 12
Do More Agents Help? Evaluating Accuracy and Cost in LLM Multi-Agent Workflows
The paper introduces BenchAgent, a framework for evaluating multi‑agent large language model (LLM) workflows against a single‑agent baseline, BenchAgent Core. Using GPT‑4.1 across ten reasoning, coding, and tool‑use benchmarks, the study compares six multi‑agent configurations, finding that EvoAgent achieves the highest mean pooled accuracy (79.70%) while other agents lag by 1.71–8.76 percentage points. The analysis also highlights trade‑offs in token consumption and accuracy, offering guidance for selecting and optimizing LLM multi‑agent workflows.
arXiv AI
Aug 7
HarnessOpt-Bench: Evaluating LLMs at Harness Optimization
arXiv:2608. 06301v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As LLMs are increasingly deployed within agentic systems, their capabilities depend not only on the model weights but also on the harness: the prompts, tools, control flow, memory, and orchestration code surrounding them.