mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

AgentBeats: Agentifying Agent Assessment for Openness, Standardization, and Reproducibility

arXiv 2606.13608 ↗First posted 11 Jun 2026cs.AI cs.LGcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks

Abstract (arXiv)

Agent systems are advancing quickly across domains, but their evaluation remains fragmented. Most benchmarks rely on fixed, LLM-centric harnesses that require heavy integration, create test-production mismatch, and limit fair comparison across diverse agent designs. The root problem is the lack of an open, agent-agnostic assessment interface. We advocate Agentified Agent Assessment (AAA), where evaluation is performed by judge agents and all participants interact through standardized protocols: A2A for task management and MCP for tool access. Conventional benchmarking defines two separate interfaces, one for the benchmark and one for the agent, while AAA only needs one; this yields a generic, unified framework that separates assessment logic from agent implementation and enables reproducible, interoperable, and multi-agent evaluation. We further introduce AgentBeats as a concrete realization of AAA: we identify five practical operation modes that make standardized assessment compatible with real-world constraints on openness, privacy, and reproducibility. To evaluate our design at scale, we conduct two studies: a five-month open competition that drew 298 judge agents across 12 categories together with 467 subject agents from independent participants, showing that AAA applies across a heterogeneous range of benchmarks; and a case study on coding agents that confirms agentified evaluation preserves fidelity with the public record while surfacing previously missing head-to-head results, yielding research insights about agent design. Combining a community-scale field study and a controlled coding case study, we verify that AAA delivers coverage, practicality, and fidelity across heterogeneous scenarios at scale. Together, AAA and AgentBeats offer a clear path toward open, standardized, and reproducible agent assessment.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 13 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jun 2026.

Builds on

13 of 43 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Holistic Agent Leaderboard: The Missing Infrastructure for AI Agent Evaluation13 Oct
  2. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains17 Jun

Other references · 11

  1. 2023WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agentscited by 1,908
  2. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,628
  3. 2025τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environmentcited by 558
  4. 2025BrowseComp-Plus: A More Fair and Transparent Evaluation Benchmark of Deep-Research Agentcited by 183
  5. 2024WebLINX: Real-World Website Navigation with Multi-Turn Dialoguecited by 177
  6. 2023Language Agents with Reinforcement Learning for Strategic Play in the Werewolf Gamecited by 148
  7. 2024PersonaGym: Evaluating Persona Agents and LLMscited by 89
  8. 2025Finance Agent Benchmark: Benchmarking LLMs on Real-world Financial Research Taskscited by 63
  9. 2025MedAgentBench: A Realistic Virtual EHR Environment to Benchmark Medical LLM Agentscited by 56
  10. 2025Build the web for agents, not agents for the webcited by 17
  11. 2026CUBE: A Standard for Unifying Agent Benchmarkscited by 2

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. 2026Agentic CLEAR: Automating Multi-Level Evaluation of LLM Agents
  2. 2026Do Agent Benchmarks Measure Capability? Protocol Validity in the Age of Agentic AI
  3. 2026Harbor Adapters and Harbor-Index: Infrastructure and a Curated Meta-Dataset for Large-Scale Agentic Evaluation
  4. 2026More than a Judge: An Empirical Study of Agent-Human Interaction in Crowdsourced Testing Assessment
  5. 2024Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agents
  6. 2025An Empirical Study of Testing Practices in Open Source AI Agent Frameworks and Agentic Applications
  7. 2026Agent-as-a-Judge
  8. 2026AEVAL: From Anecdotal to Deterministic Testing for Agentic Skill Workflows