# Claw-Eval-Live: A Live Agent Benchmark for Evolving Real-World Workflows

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.28139 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.28139/

## Key facts

- Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 39 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Apr 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Software engineering coding agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/software-engineering-coding-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 39)

- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13854/) (2023)
- [AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.08155/) (2023)
- [ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16789/) (2023)
- [MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00352/) (2023)
- [τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12045/) (2024)
- [Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15334/) (2023)
- [AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03688/) (2023)
- [Mind2Web: Towards a Generalist Agent for the Web](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.06070/) (2023)
- [OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.07972/) (2024)
- [HuggingGPT: Solving AI Tasks with ChatGPT and its Friends in Hugging Face](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17580/) (2023)
- [GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistants](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12983/) (2023)
- [OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.16741/) (2024)
- [API-Bank: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Tool-Augmented LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08244/) (2023)
- [Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.11868/) (2026)
- [Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15817/) (2023)
- [AndroidWorld: A Dynamic Benchmarking Environment for Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14573/) (2024)
- [DS-1000: A Natural and Reliable Benchmark for Data Science Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.11501/) (2022)
- [RepoBench: Benchmarking Repository-Level Code Auto-Completion Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.03091/) (2023)
- [TheAgentCompany: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Consequential Real World Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14161/) (2024)
- [Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14470/) (2024)
- [CRUXEval: A Benchmark for Code Reasoning, Understanding and Execution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.03065/) (2024)
- [MINT: Evaluating LLMs in Multi-turn Interaction with Tools and Language Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.10691/) (2023)
- [R-Judge: Benchmarking Safety Risk Awareness for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10019/) (2024)
- [An Illusion of Progress? Assessing the Current State of Web Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.01382/) (2025)
- [The BrowserGym Ecosystem for Web Agent Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.05467/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [Orchard: An Open-Source Agentic Modeling Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.15040/) (2026)
- [PhoneHarness: Harnessing Phone-Use Agents through Mixed GUI, CLI, and Tool Actions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.14832/) (2026)
- [LITMUS: Benchmarking Behavioral Jailbreaks of LLM Agents in Real OS Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.10779/) (2026)
- [PhoneBuddy: Training Open Models for Agentic Phone Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.23049/) (2026)
- [Embodied-BenchClaw: An Autonomous Multi-Agent System for Embodied Spatial Intelligence Benchmark Construction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.11909/) (2026)
- [PolyWorkBench: Benchmarking LLM Agents for Cross-Lingual Long-Horizon Workflows](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.06008/) (2026)
- [Delegation Intelligence in Deep Search: A Controllable Framework for Disentangled Capability Diagnosis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.23524/) (2026)
- [JarvisHub: An Open Harness for Canvas-Native Multimodal Creative Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.23588/) (2026)
- [SecRespond: Benchmarking AI Agents for Real-World Post-Compromise Incident Response](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.26791/) (2026)
- [ClawTrack: Towards Trace-Level Evaluation and Improvement of Real-World Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.28037/) (2026)
- [DAREBench: Deployment-Aware and Reliable Evaluation of Models as Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.06059/) (2026)
- [ClawLoop: Self-Improving Agents via Harness-Native Training Loop](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.14118/) (2026)
- [Recursive Environment Scaling for General Long-Horizon Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.16397/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

LLM agents are expected to complete end-to-end units of work across software tools, business services, and local workspaces. Yet many agent benchmarks freeze a curated task set at release time and grade mainly the final response, making it difficult to evaluate agents against evolving workflow demand or verify whether a task was executed. We introduce Claw-Eval-Live, a live benchmark for workflow agents that separates a refreshable signal layer, updated across releases from public workflow-demand signals, from a reproducible, time-stamped release snapshot. Each release is constructed from public workflow-demand signals, with ClawHub Top-500 skills used in the current release, and materialized as controlled tasks with fixed fixtures, services, workspaces, and graders. For grading, Claw-Eval-Live records execution traces, audit logs, service state, and post-run workspace artifacts, using deterministic checks when evidence is sufficient and structured LLM judging only for semantic dimensions. The release contains 105 tasks spanning controlled business services and local workspace repair, and evaluates 13 frontier models under a shared public pass rule. Experiments reveal that reliable workflow automation remains far from solved: the leading model passes only 66.7% of tasks and no model reaches 70%. Failures are structured by task family and execution surface, with HR, management, and multi-system business workflows as persistent bottlenecks and local workspace repair comparatively easier but unsaturated. Leaderboard rank alone is insufficient because models with similar pass rates can diverge in overall completion, and task-level discrimination concentrates in a middle band of tasks. Claw-Eval-Live suggests that workflow-agent evaluation should be grounded twice, in fresh external demand and in verifiable agent action.