Holistic Agent Leaderboard: The Missing Infrastructure for AI Agent Evaluation
Sayash Kapoor, Benedikt Stroebl, Peter Kirgis, Nitya Nadgir, Zachary S Siegel, Boyi Wei, Tianci Xue, Ziru Chen, Felix Chen, Saiteja Utpala, Franck Ndzomga, Dheeraj Oruganty
Abstract
AI agents have been developed for complex real-world tasks from coding to customer service. But AI agent evaluations suffer from many challenges that undermine our understanding of how well agents really work (Figure 1 ). We introduce the Holistic Agent Leaderboard (HAL) to address these challenges. We make three main contributions. First, we provide a standardized evaluation harness that orchestrates parallel evaluations across hundreds of VMs, reducing evaluation time from weeks to hours while eliminating common implementation bugs. Second, we conduct three-dimensional analysis spanning models, scaffolds, and benchmarks. We validate the harness by conducting 21,730 agent rollouts across 9 models and 9 benchmarks in coding, web navigation, science, and customer service with a total cost of about $40,000. Our analysis reveals surprising insights, such as higher reasoning effort reducing accuracy in the majority of runs. Third, we use LLM-aided log inspection to uncover previously unreported behaviors, such as searching for the benchmark on HuggingFace instead of solving a task, or misusing credit cards in flight booking tasks. We share all agent logs, comprising 2.5B tokens of language model calls, to incentivize further research into agent behavior. By standardizing how the field evaluates agents and addressing common pitfalls in agent evaluation, we hope to shift the focus from agents that ace benchmarks to agents that work reliably in the real world. Figure 1: Challenges in evaluating AI agents and how HAL addresses them.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext cf890900-407a-49bb-a318-d7fd163e4f05Cited by top-tier papers2
- Towards a Science of AI Agent ReliabilityStephan Rabanser, Sayash Kapoor, Peter Kirgis, Kangheng Liu et al.ICML 2026 · 45 citations
- How does Chain of Thought decompose complex tasks?Amrut Nadgir, Vijay Balasubramanian, Pratik ChaudhariICML 2026 · 1 citation
Builds on12
- SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-world Github Issues?Carlos E. Jimenez, John Yang, Alexander Wettig, Shunyu Yao et al.ICLR 2024 · 2,082 citations
- SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software EngineeringJohn Yang, Carlos E. Jimenez, Alexander Wettig, Kilian Lieret et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 2,059 citations
- WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous AgentsShuyan Zhou, Frank F. Xu, Hao Zhu, Xuhui Zhou et al.ICLR 2024 · 1,197 citations
- Deep Reinforcement Learning at the Edge of the Statistical PrecipiceRishabh Agarwal, Max Schwarzer, Pablo Samuel Castro, Aaron C. Courville et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 1,067 citations
- GAIA: a benchmark for General AI AssistantsGrégoire Mialon, Clémentine Fourrier, Thomas Wolf, Yann LeCun et al.ICLR 2024 · 716 citations
Related papers
- AgencyBench: Benchmarking the Frontiers of Autonomous Agents in 1M-Token Real-World ContextsKeyu Li, Junhao Shi, Yang Xiao, Mohan Jiang et al.ACL 2026 · 14 citations
- AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as AgentsXiao Liu, Hao Yu, Hanchen Zhang, Yifan Xu et al.ICLR 2024 · 748 citations
- A Benchmark for Deep Information SynthesisDebjit Paul, Daniel Murphy, Milan Gritta, Ronald Cardenas et al.ICLR 2026 · 1 citation
- FormulaCode: Evaluating Agentic Optimization on Large CodebasesAtharva Sehgal, James Hou, Akanksha Sarkar, Ishaan Mantripragada et al.ICML 2026 · 3 citations
- DA-Code: Agent Data Science Code Generation Benchmark for Large Language ModelsYiming Huang, Jianwen Luo, Yan Yu, Yitong Zhang et al.EMNLP 2024 · 7 citations
