Towards Direct Evaluation of Harness Optimizers via Priority Ranking
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Harness optimization enables automated agent creation by having an optimizer agent iteratively update the harness of target agents. Despite its success, current studies evaluate optimizers solely by observing target agents' performance gains. This indirect end-improvement evaluation neglects optimizers' actions at intermediate steps, which are often erroneous and hinder agent performance in deployment. Therefore, it is unclear whether harness optimization is driven by optimizers' informed update actions or simply trial-and-error. This necessitates direct evaluation of harness optimizers. However, evaluating harness optimizers directly is non-trivial and costly due to the lack of oracle harnesses. To address this, we present a simple, low-cost design to directly evaluate them, namely priority ranking. By asking harness optimizers to rank components (e.g., tools) in a given harness by their potential to improve/hinder agent performance when updated, our design quantifies optimizer ability at the step level without expensive rollouts or manual examination. More importantly, optimizers' ranking performance correlates with their ability to improve agents in actual multi-step harness optimization, establishing priority ranking as a reliable indicator of optimization ability. Priority ranking is enabled by SHOR, a collection of 182 human-verified optimization scenarios spanning across domains, designs, and time stages. Code and data: https://github.com/k59118/Harness_Optimizer_Evaluation.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 43 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 May 2026.
Builds on
43 of 59 references.
References · 43
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,064
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,748
- 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,628
- 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,280
- 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,084
- 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agentscited by 956
- 2026DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligencecited by 877
- 2023Large Language Models as Optimizerscited by 830
- 2023ExpeL: LLM Agents Are Experiential Learnerscited by 814
31 more
- 2025AlphaEvolve: A coding agent for scientific and algorithmic discoverycited by 763
- 2025τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environmentcited by 558
- 2024Executable Code Actions Elicit Better LLM Agentscited by 537
- 2025GEPA: Reflective Prompt Evolution Can Outperform Reinforcement Learningcited by 449
- 2024AFlow: Automating Agentic Workflow Generationcited by 395
- 2024Automated Design of Agentic Systemscited by 360
- 2024AppWorld: A Controllable World of Apps and People for Benchmarking Interactive Coding Agentscited by 359
- 2025Agentic Context Engineering: Evolving Contexts for Self-Improving Language Modelscited by 349
- 2026Meta-Harness: End-to-End Optimization of Model Harnessescited by 248
- 2024Spider 2.0: Evaluating Language Models on Real-World Enterprise Text-to-SQL Workflowscited by 223
- 2025Dynamic Cheatsheet: Test-Time Learning with Adaptive Memorycited by 146
- 2024Web Agents with World Models: Learning and Leveraging Environment Dynamics in Web Navigationcited by 116
- 2025FlowReasoner: Reinforcing Query-Level Meta-Agentscited by 56
- 2025Your Agent May Misevolve: Emergent Risks in Self-evolving LLM Agentscited by 52
- 2025ThetaEvolve: Test-time Learning on Open Problemscited by 52
- 2024Towards Lifelong Dialogue Agents via Timeline-based Memory Managementcited by 50
- 2025ScoreFlow: Mastering LLM Agent Workflows via Score-based Preference Optimizationcited by 50
- 2025AutoAgent: A Fully-Automated and Zero-Code Framework for LLM Agentscited by 49
- 2026Hyperagentscited by 40
- 2026Dr. Zero: Self-Evolving Search Agents without Training Datacited by 39
- 2026CORAL: Towards Autonomous Multi-Agent Evolution for Open-Ended Discoverycited by 38
- 2026ReCreate: Reasoning and Creating Domain Agents Driven by Experiencecited by 22
- 2026From Static Templates to Dynamic Runtime Graphs: A Survey of Workflow Optimization for LLM Agentscited by 22
- 2025RobustFlow: Towards Robust Agentic Workflow Generationcited by 19
- 2025CompileAgent: Automated Real-World Repo-Level Compilation with Tool-Integrated LLM-based Agent Systemcited by 15
- 2025Embodied Agents Meet Personalization: Investigating Challenges and Solutions Through the Lens of Memory Utilizationcited by 15
- 2025PRINCIPLES: Synthetic Strategy Memory for Proactive Dialogue Agentscited by 15
- 2026VeRO: A Harness for Agents to Optimize Agentscited by 12
- 2024Coffee-Gym: An Environment for Evaluating and Improving Natural Language Feedback on Erroneous Codecited by 9
- 2026SWE-Bench Mobile: Can Large Language Model Agents Develop Industry-Level Mobile Applications?cited by 8
- 2026Workflow-R1: Group Sub-sequence Policy Optimization for Multi-turn Workflow Constructioncited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.