mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Redundant or Necessary? A Benchmark for Detecting Redundant Steps in Agent Trajectories

arXiv 2605.29893 ↗First posted 28 May 2026cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in solving complex tasks through multi-step reasoning and tool use. However, existing evaluation protocols primarily focus on task success, overlooking a critical aspect of agent behavior: execution efficiency. In practice, agent trajectories often contain redundant steps that consume substantial resources while contributing little to task completion. In this work, we propose and formulate a new research area: redundant step detection for agent trajectories. To support this initiative, we introduce RedundancyBench, a new benchmark that contains diverse tasks with carefully annotated trajectories, where each step is labeled according to its contribution to task completion. Using RedundancyBench, we develop and evaluate 3 representative methods to answer whether a step within trajectory is redundant or necessary. Our results show that even the best-performing method achieves only 24.88% score in detecting redundant steps, while some methods perform worse than random guessing. These results highlight the task's complexity and the need for further research in this area. footnoteCode and dataset in this paper are both available in hrefhttps://anonymous.4open.science/r/RedundancyBenchhttps://anonymous.4open.science/r/RedundancyBench.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 21 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 May 2026.

Builds on

21 of 29 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Reducing Cost of LLM Agents with Trajectory Reduction28 Sep
  2. 2025AlphaEvolve: A coding agent for scientific and algorithmic discovery16 Jun
  3. 2025Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems30 Apr

Other references · 18

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  2. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
  3. 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,384
  4. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,280
  5. 2022WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language Agentscited by 1,197
  6. 2026DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligencecited by 877
  7. 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 724
  8. 2024AgentBoard: An Analytical Evaluation Board of Multi-turn LLM Agentscited by 319
  9. 2024Autonomous Evaluation and Refinement of Digital Agentscited by 136
  10. 2024SPA-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for SmartPhone Agent Evaluationcited by 79
  11. 2024MobileAgentBench: An Efficient and User-Friendly Benchmark for Mobile LLM Agentscited by 63
  12. 2025DeepShop: A Benchmark for Deep Research Shopping Agentscited by 42
6 more
  1. 2026ClawBench: Can AI Agents Complete Everyday Online Tasks?cited by 28
  2. 2024AgentQuest: A Modular Benchmark Framework to Measure Progress and Improve LLM Agentscited by 27
  3. 2025Multi-Agent-as-Judge: Aligning LLM-Agent-Based Automated Evaluation with Multi-Dimensional Human Evaluationcited by 26
  4. 2025Automatic Failure Attribution and Critical Step Prediction Method for Multi-Agent Systems Based on Causal Inferencecited by 18
  5. 2026ShopSimulator: Evaluating and Exploring RL-Driven LLM Agent for Shopping Assistantscited by 9
  6. 2026QuantClaw: Precision Where It Matters for OpenClawcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026FALAT: Tracing Failures in LLM Agent Trajectories via Dependency-Guided Search
  2. 2026DynSTEER: Dynamic Stage-wise Trajectory Evaluation and Execution-time Review for Agents
  3. 2026Long-Horizon Agent Trajectory Attribution: A Unified Benchmark and Fine-Grained Annotation Framework
  4. 2026AgentProcessBench: Diagnosing Step-Level Process Quality in Tool-Using Agents
  5. 2026StepFinder: A Temporal Semantic Framework for Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems
  6. 2026TRAJDEBUG: Tracing Error Lifecycle to Identify Critical Failures in Long-Horizon Agent Trajectories
  7. 2025TRAJECT-Bench:A Trajectory-Aware Benchmark for Evaluating Agentic Tool Use
  8. 2025Beyond the Final Answer: Evaluating the Reasoning Trajectories of Tool-Augmented Agents