AgentEval: DAG-Structured Step-Level Evaluation for Agentic Workflows with Error Propagation Tracking
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Agentic systems that chain reasoning, tool use, and synthesis into multi-step workflows are entering production, yet prevailing evaluation practices like end-to-end outcome checks and ad-hoc trace inspection systematically mask the intermediate failures that dominate real-world error budgets. We present AgentEval, a framework that formalizes agent executions as evaluation directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), where each node carries typed quality metrics assessed by a calibrated LLM judge (GPT-4o), classified through a hierarchical failure taxonomy (3 levels, 21 subcategories), and linked to upstream dependencies for automated root cause attribution. An ablation study isolates the impact of DAG-based dependency modeling: it alone contributes +22 percentage points to failure detection recall and +34 pp to root cause accuracy over flat step-level evaluation with identical judges and rubrics. Across three production workflows (450 test cases, two agent model families, predominantly sequential architectures with a 12% non-DAG trace rate), AgentEval achieves 2.17x higher failure detection recall than end-to-end evaluation (0.89 vs. 0.41), Cohen's kappa = 0.84 agreement with human experts, and 72% root cause accuracy against an 81% human ceiling. Cross-system evaluation on tau-bench and SWE-bench traces confirms transferability (failure detection recall >= 0.78) without taxonomy or rubric modification. A 4-month pilot with 18 engineers detected 23 pre-release regressions through CI/CD-integrated regression testing, reducing median root-cause identification time from 4.2 hours to 22 minutes and driving measurable failure rate reductions in two workflows.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 14 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Apr 2026.
Builds on
14 of 29 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Where LLM Agents Fail and How They can Learn From Failures29 Sep
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?17 Mar
Other references · 12
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,072
- 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
- 2023WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agentscited by 1,908
- 2023Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIscited by 1,302
- 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,280
- 2022Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedbackcited by 871
- 2023Language Agent Tree Search Unifies Reasoning Acting and Planning in Language Modelscited by 551
- 2024AgentBoard: An Analytical Evaluation Board of Multi-turn LLM Agentscited by 319
- 2025Survey on Evaluation of LLM-based Agentscited by 190
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 8.
8 papers.
- 2026From Failed Trajectories to Reliable LLM Agents: Diagnosing and Repairing Harness Flawscited by 21
- 2026Toward User-Conditioned Evaluation of Personal LLM Agents under Temporal Interventionscited by 1
- 2026Graph-Structured Rubrics: Compiling Rubrics into Typed Evaluation Graphs for LLM Judgescited by 0
- 2026Terminal Agents: A Survey of AI Agents in Command-Line Environmentscited by 0
- 2026ATLAS: Dual-Horizon Diagnostic Evaluation for Industrial Tool-Use Agentscited by 0
- 2026Thinking Before Thinking: Scaling Agentic Inference Through Meta-Reasoningcited by 0
- 2026Where Scientific Search Agents Fail: Decision-Checkpoint Auditing of Exposure and Inspection Attemptscited by 0
- 2026Continuous Process-Level Evaluation for Evolving Enterprise AI Agent Skillscited by 0
- 2026Continuous Process-Level Evaluation for Evolving Enterprise AI Agent Skills1 Oct 2026
- 2026Where Scientific Search Agents Fail: Decision-Checkpoint Auditing of Exposure and Inspection Attempts29 Sep 2026
- 2026Thinking Before Thinking: Scaling Agentic Inference Through Meta-Reasoning29 Sep 2026
- 2026ATLAS: Dual-Horizon Diagnostic Evaluation for Industrial Tool-Use Agents31 Aug 2026
- 2026Terminal Agents: A Survey of AI Agents in Command-Line Environments20 Aug 2026
- 2026Graph-Structured Rubrics: Compiling Rubrics into Typed Evaluation Graphs for LLM Judges12 Aug 2026
- 2026Toward User-Conditioned Evaluation of Personal LLM Agents under Temporal Interventions20 Jul 2026
- 2026From Failed Trajectories to Reliable LLM Agents: Diagnosing and Repairing Harness Flaws4 Jun 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025AgentCompass: Towards Reliable Evaluation of Agentic Workflows in Production
- 2025TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localization
- 2026AgentProcessBench: Diagnosing Step-Level Process Quality in Tool-Using Agents
- 2026AgentRx: Diagnosing AI Agent Failures from Execution Trajectories
- 2026DeFA: Dependency-Guided Failure Attribution for LLM Agents
- 2026ParaRecover: A Process-Level Benchmark for Error Localization and Recovery in Parallel Tool-Use Agents
- 2026Willful Disobedience: Automatically Detecting Failures in Agentic Traces
- 2026AgentFixer: From Failure Detection to Fix Recommendations in LLM Agentic Systems