HANSEL: Extracting Breadcrumbs from Web Agent Trajectories for Interactive Verification
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Web, search, and research agents
Abstract (arXiv)
AI web agents can perform complex, multi-step tasks such as searching for products, comparing options, and making purchases on behalf of users. However, verifying the correctness of an agent's output remains difficult. Existing transparency mechanisms, including full trajectory logs, source links, screenshots, and LLM-generated summaries, treat verification as a passive reading task, leaving users to sift through overwhelming logs or trust potentially unfaithful explanations. We present HANSEL (Highlighting Agent Navigation Steps as Evidence Links), a system that extracts interactive, verifiable evidence from web-agent trajectories. Given an agent trajectory, HANSEL extracts evidence pages and snippets and presents them as navigable, interactive views with relevant page state preserved (e.g., applied filters, search queries, and scroll positions), enabling users to verify how the agent arrived at its answer. When the agent's answer cannot be traced to any visited page, HANSEL explicitly flags this gap. A technical evaluation on 45 tasks from AssistantBench and Online-Mind2Web shows that HANSEL achieves 83.7% precision and 88.8% recall in identifying evidence pages, while reducing trajectory volume by 61.6%. In a controlled user study with 14 participants, HANSEL significantly reduced task completion time and perceived effort compared to a standard agent interface, while participants rated it significantly higher on usability, verification ease, and error identification. Our results demonstrate that reframing verification as an interactive activity, rather than passive consumption of agent explanations, leads to more efficient human oversight of AI agents.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 28 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2026.
Builds on
28 of 54 references.
Closest ancestors · 8
Same direction, newest first
- 2025AgentRewardBench: Evaluating Automatic Evaluations of Web Agent Trajectories11 Apr
- 2025An Illusion of Progress? Assessing the Current State of Web Agents2 Apr
- 2025CowPilot: A Framework for Autonomous and Human-Agent Collaborative Web Navigation28 Jan
- 2024AgentTrek: Agent Trajectory Synthesis via Guiding Replay with Web Tutorials12 Dec
- 2024AssistantBench: Can Web Agents Solve Realistic and Time-Consuming Tasks?22 Jul
- 2024GPT-4V(ision) is a Generalist Web Agent, if Grounded3 Jan
- 2023Mind2Web: Towards a Generalist Agent for the Web9 Jun
- 2022WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language Agents4 Jul
Other references · 20
- 2021WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedbackcited by 1,722
- 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,084
- 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,081
- 2020Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performancecited by 396
- 2021AI Chains: Transparent and Controllable Human-AI Interaction by Chaining Large Language Model Promptscited by 265
- 2024Are self-explanations from Large Language Models faithful?cited by 101
- 2023On the Planning Abilities of Large Language Models (A Critical Investigation with a Proposed Benchmark)cited by 85
- 2025Holistic Agent Leaderboard: The Missing Infrastructure for AI Agent Evaluationcited by 83
- 2025Interactive Debugging and Steering of Multi-Agent AI Systemscited by 68
- 2018Learning to Navigate the Webcited by 60
- 2025Plan-Then-Execute: An Empirical Study of User Trust and Team Performance When Using LLM Agents As A Daily Assistantcited by 54
- 2022Do People Engage Cognitively with AI? Impact of AI Assistance on Incidental Learningcited by 53
8 more
- 2025Magentic-UI: Towards Human-in-the-loop Agentic Systemscited by 41
- 2024Cocoa: Co-Planning and Co-Execution with AI Agentscited by 38
- 2019Ask Not What AI Can Do, But What AI Should Do: Towards a Framework of Task Delegabilitycited by 36
- 2024Chain-of-Thought Unfaithfulness as Disguised Accuracycited by 27
- 2025Morae: Proactively Pausing UI Agents for User Choicescited by 18
- 2025Evaluating Long-Context Reasoning in LLM-Based WebAgentscited by 15
- 2025Improving Human Verification of LLM Reasoning through Interactive Explanation Interfacescited by 7
- 2025XAgen: An Explainability Tool for Identifying and Correcting Failures in Multi-Agent Workflowscited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026InSight: A Benchmark for Agentic Claim Verification in Interactive Visualizations
- 2026Do Web Agents Investigate Before They Decide?
- 2026Overseeing Agents Without Constant Oversight: Challenges and Opportunities
- 2025BEARCUBS: A benchmark for computer-using web agents
- 2026AgentSim: A Platform for Verifiable Agent-Trace Simulation
- 2025WebArxiv: A Reproducible Benchmark for Evaluating Multimodal Web Agents on arXiv Tasks
- 2025EMULATE: A Multi-Agent Framework for Determining the Veracity of Atomic Claims by Emulating Human Actions
- 2025VeriWeb: Verifiable Long-Chain Web Benchmark for Agentic Information-Seeking