mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Agent Bain vs. Agent McKinsey: A New Text-to-SQL Benchmark for the Business Domain

arXiv 2510.07309 ↗First posted 8 Oct 2025cs.CLcited by 3

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Web, search, and research agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Text-to-SQL benchmarks have traditionally only tested simple data access as a translation task of natural language to SQL queries. But in reality, users tend to ask diverse questions that require more complex responses including data-driven predictions or recommendations. Using the business domain as a motivating example, we introduce CORGI, a new benchmark that expands text-to-SQL to reflect practical database queries encountered by end users. CORGI is composed of synthetic databases inspired by enterprises such as DoorDash, Airbnb, and Lululemon. It provides questions across four increasingly complicated categories of business queries: descriptive, explanatory, predictive, and recommendational. This challenge calls for causal reasoning, temporal forecasting, and strategic recommendation, reflecting multi-level and multi-step agentic intelligence. We find that LLM performance degrades on higher-level questions as question complexity increases. CORGI also introduces and encourages the text-to-SQL community to consider new automatic methods for evaluating open-ended, qualitative responses in data access tasks. Our experiments show that LLMs exhibit an average 33.12% lower success execution rate (SER) on CORGI compared to existing benchmarks such as BIRD, highlighting the substantially higher complexity of real-world business needs. We release the CORGI dataset, an evaluation framework, and a submission website to support future research.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 22 of its 81 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Oct 2025.

Builds on

22 of 81 references.

References · 22

  1. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,854
  2. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
  3. 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 3,961
  4. 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,655
  5. 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
  6. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
  7. 2018Spider: A Large-Scale Human-Labeled Dataset for Complex and Cross-Domain Semantic Parsing and Text-to-SQL Taskcited by 1,120
  8. 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,050
  9. 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 724
  10. 2017Seq2SQL: Generating Structured Queries from Natural Language using Reinforcement Learningcited by 679
  11. 2023Can LLM Already Serve as A Database Interface? A BIg Bench for Large-Scale Database Grounded Text-to-SQLscited by 667
  12. 2018Improving Text-to-SQL Evaluation Methodologycited by 133
10 more
  1. 2024AI Hospital: Benchmarking Large Language Models in a Multi-agent Medical Interaction Simulatorcited by 99
  2. 2025SQL-R1: Training Natural Language to SQL Reasoning Model By Reinforcement Learningcited by 67
  3. 2025Arctic-Text2SQL-R1: Simple Rewards, Strong Reasoning in Text-to-SQLcited by 38
  4. 2024In-Context Fine-Tuning for Time-Series Foundation Modelscited by 31
  5. 2023A Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models on Legal Judgment Predictioncited by 27
  6. 2025BIRD-INTERACT: Re-imagining Text-to-SQL Evaluation for Large Language Models via Lens of Dynamic Interactionscited by 17
  7. 2025Cheaper, Better, Faster, Stronger: Robust Text-to-SQL without Chain-of-Thought or Fine-Tuningcited by 13
  8. 2020Biased Programmers? Or Biased Data? A Field Experiment in Operationalizing AI Ethicscited by 10
  9. 2024Large Language Model Evaluation Via Multi AI Agents: Preliminary resultscited by 10
  10. 2025FLAME: Financial Large-Language Model Assessment and Metrics Evaluationcited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025BAPPA: Benchmarking Agents, Plans, and Pipelines for Automated Text-to-SQL Generation
  2. 2026Agentic-SQL Revisited: Autonomy-Based Taxonomy and Empirical Benchmark Analysis for LLM Text-to-SQL
  3. 2026Business Logic-Driven Text-to-SQL Data Synthesis for Business Intelligence
  4. 2026AgentSM: Semantic Memory for Agentic Text-to-SQL
  5. 2025Rethinking Text-to-SQL: Dynamic Multi-turn SQL Interaction for Real-world Database Exploration
  6. 2023On Evaluating the Integration of Reasoning and Action in LLM Agents with Database Question Answering
  7. 2025FinAgentBench: A Benchmark Dataset for Agentic Retrieval in Financial Question Answering
  8. 2025RAISE: Reasoning Agent for Interactive SQL Exploration