Build, Judge, Optimize: A Blueprint for Continuous Improvement of Multi-Agent Consumer Assistants
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate
Abstract (arXiv)
Conversational shopping assistants (CSAs) represent a compelling application of agentic AI, but moving from prototype to production reveals two underexplored challenges: how to evaluate multi-turn interactions and how to optimize tightly coupled multi-agent systems. Grocery shopping further amplifies these difficulties, as user requests are often underspecified, highly preference-sensitive, and constrained by factors such as budget and inventory. In this paper, we present a practical blueprint for evaluating and optimizing conversational shopping assistants, illustrated through a production-scale AI grocery assistant. We introduce a multi-faceted evaluation rubric that decomposes end-to-end shopping quality into structured dimensions and develop a calibrated LLM-as-judge pipeline aligned with human annotations. Building on this evaluation foundation, we investigate two complementary prompt-optimization strategies based on a SOTA prompt-optimizer called GEPA (Shao et al., 2025): (1) Sub-agent GEPA, which optimizes individual agent nodes against localized rubrics, and (2) MAMuT (Multi-Agent Multi-Turn) GEPA (Herrera et al., 2026), a novel system-level approach that jointly optimizes prompts across agents using multi-turn simulation and trajectory-level scoring. We release rubric templates and evaluation design guidance to support practitioners building production CSAs.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 6 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Mar 2026.
Builds on
6 of 17 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 5
- 2025GEPA: Reflective Prompt Evolution Can Outperform Reinforcement Learningcited by 449
- 2025HealthBench: Evaluating Large Language Models Towards Improved Human Healthcited by 385
- 2024TextGrad: Automatic "Differentiation" via Textcited by 250
- 2025MultiAgentBench: Evaluating the Collaboration and Competition of LLM agentscited by 169
- 2025Leveraging LLMs as Meta-Judges: A Multi-Agent Framework for Evaluating LLM Judgmentscited by 16
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
- 2026SPEAR: Code-Augmented Agentic Prompt Optimizationcited by 0
- 2026SPEAR: Code-Augmented Agentic Prompt Optimization25 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026On Evaluating and Improving Conversational Agents in Production
- 2026Shopping Reasoning Bench: An Expert-Authored Benchmark for Multi-Turn Conversational Shopping Assistants
- 2026Iterating Toward Better Search: A Two-Agent Simulation Framework for Evaluating Agentic Search Architectures in E-Commerce
- 2026ChatShopBuddy: Towards Reliable Conversational Shopping Agents via Reinforcement Learning
- 2026Operationalising Multi-Dimensional Evaluation for Conversational Agents: A Scalable, Governed Pipeline with Selective Re-evaluation and Model Benchmarking
- 2025FaMA: LLM-Empowered Agentic Assistant for Consumer-to-Consumer Marketplace
- 2026RealWorldShop: Benchmarking and Improving Conversational Shopping Agents in Real-World E-commerce
- 2026EComAgentBench: Benchmarking Shopping Agents on Long-Horizon Tasks with Distributed Hidden Intent