# Talk, Evaluate, Diagnose: User-aware Agent Evaluation with Automated Error Analysis

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.15483 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.15483/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 18 of its 21 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Mar 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13854/) (2023)
- [τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12045/) (2024)
- [AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03688/) (2023)
- [ALFWorld: Aligning Text and Embodied Environments for Interactive Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03768/) (2020)
- [OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.07972/) (2024)
- [τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.07982/) (2025)
- [AgentBoard: An Analytical Evaluation Board of Multi-turn LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.13178/) (2024)
- [MINT: Evaluating LLMs in Multi-turn Interaction with Tools and Language Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.10691/) (2023)
- [ToolSandbox: A Stateful, Conversational, Interactive Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Tool Use Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.04682/) (2024)
- [BabyAI: A Platform to Study the Sample Efficiency of Grounded Language Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.08272/) (2018)
- [SMART: Self-Aware Agent for Tool Overuse Mitigation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11435/) (2025)
- [CRMArena-Pro: Holistic Assessment of LLM Agents Across Diverse Business Scenarios and Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.18878/) (2025)
- [FlowBench: Revisiting and Benchmarking Workflow-Guided Planning for LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14884/) (2024)
- [Benchmarking Agentic Workflow Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.07869/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Personalized Tool-Augmented LLMs from the Perspectives of Personalization and Proactivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.00771/) (2025)
- [Enhancing Tool Learning in Large Language Models with Hierarchical Error Checklists](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.00042/) (2025)
- [EscapeBench: Towards Advancing Creative Intelligence of Language Model Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.13549/) (2024)
- [DICE-BENCH: Evaluating the Tool-Use Capabilities of Large Language Models in Multi-Round, Multi-Party Dialogues](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.22853/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [How to Interpret Agent Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.13625/) (2026)
- [Autonomous Research Agents: A Survey of AI Scientists and the Verification Gap](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.05179/) (2026)
- [AgentWorld: Personality-Aware Reliability Evaluation for Agentic Information Retrieval](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.24076/) (2026)
- [Debiasing as a Measurement Intervention: Calibrated Ties and Resolution Loss in LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.12439/) (2026)
- [EDGEGEN: Improving Tool-Calling Agents Beyond Happy Paths with Synthetic Edge Case Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.24115/) (2026)
- [Synthesis Through Simulation: Generating Coherent Enterprise Data via Scalable Agent-System Interaction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.10549/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Agent applications are increasingly adopted to automate workflows across diverse tasks. However, due to the heterogeneous domains they operate in, it is challenging to create a scalable evaluation framework. Prior works each employ their own methods to determine task success, such as database lookups, regex match, etc., adding complexity to the development of a unified agent evaluation approach. Moreover, they do not systematically account for the user's role nor expertise in the interaction, providing incomplete insights into the agent's performance. We argue that effective agent evaluation goes beyond correctness alone, incorporating conversation quality, efficiency and systematic diagnosis of agent errors. To address this, we introduce the TED framework (Talk, Evaluate, Diagnose). (1) Talk: We leverage reusable, generic expert and non-expert user persona templates for user-agent interaction. (2) Evaluate: We adapt existing datasets by representing subgoals-such as tool signatures, and responses-as natural language grading notes, evaluated automatically with LLM-as-a-judge. We propose new metrics that capture both turn efficiency and intermediate progress of the agent complementing the user-aware setup. (3) Diagnose: We introduce an automated error analysis tool that analyzes the inconsistencies of the judge and agents, uncovering common errors, and providing actionable feedback for agent improvement. We show that our TED framework reveals new insights regarding agent performance across models and user expertise levels. We also demonstrate potential gains in agent performance with peaks of 8-10% on our proposed metrics after incorporating the identified error remedies into the agent's design.