# LegalWorld: A Life-Cycle Interactive Environment for Legal Agents

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.18728 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.18728/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 22 of its 34 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 22 of 22)

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.11432/) (2023)
- [ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16789/) (2023)
- [LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.14508/) (2023)
- [MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08560/) (2023)
- [Evaluating Very Long-Term Conversational Memory of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.17753/) (2024)
- [LongBench v2: Towards Deeper Understanding and Reasoning on Realistic Long-context Multitasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15204/) (2024)
- [SOTOPIA: Interactive Evaluation for Social Intelligence in Language Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11667/) (2023)
- [Agent Hospital: A Simulacrum of Hospital with Evolvable Medical Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.02957/) (2024)
- [Two Tales of Persona in LLMs: A Survey of Role-Playing and Personalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01171/) (2024)
- [CAIL2018: A Large-Scale Legal Dataset for Judgment Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.02478/) (2018)
- [MemSkill: Learning and Evolving Memory Skills for Self-Evolving Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.02474/) (2026)
- [DISC-LawLLM: Fine-tuning Large Language Models for Intelligent Legal Services](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.11325/) (2023)
- [AgentsCourt: Building Judicial Decision-Making Agents with Court Debate Simulation and Legal Knowledge Augmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02959/) (2024)
- [AgentCourt: Simulating Court with Adversarial Evolvable Lawyer Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08089/) (2024)
- [PatientSim: A Persona-Driven Simulator for Realistic Doctor-Patient Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.17818/) (2025)
- [Learning Interpretable Legal Case Retrieval via Knowledge-Guided Case Reformulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.19760/) (2024)
- [Overview of CAIL2018: Legal Judgment Prediction Competition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.05851/) (2018)
- [Ready Jurist One: Benchmarking Language Agents for Legal Intelligence in Dynamic Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.04037/) (2025)
- [Enhancing Legal Case Retrieval via Scaling High-quality Synthetic Query-Candidate Pairs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.06581/) (2024)
- [Evolution in Simulation: AI-Agent School with Dual Memory for High-Fidelity Educational Dynamics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.11290/) (2025)
- [Law in Silico: Simulating Legal Society with LLM-Based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.24442/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Test-Time Agent Evolution for Long-Horizon Legal Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.08138/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Civil litigation is inherently a life-cycle process: what a lawyer drafts on day one constrains what unfolds at trial months later. Yet existing legal benchmarks evaluate isolated subtasks, and prior legal-agent simulators reinitialize each scenario from shared ground truth, leaving cross-stage causal dependencies unmodeled. We present LegalWorld, a life-cycle interactive environment that models Chinese civil litigation as a causally connected state chain of five stages (seven sub-scenarios), grounded in 75,309 paired Chinese civil judgments. We pair it with reusable infrastructure (local memory, global case memory, a Skill/Tool library) that keeps each dispute consistent across its full life cycle. Building on this environment, we construct LongJud-Bench to evaluate agent capability across all five connected stages. 18,992 ratings from 217 legal-background evaluators confirm that LegalWorld trajectories are procedurally faithful and role-consistent; and a capability-level cross-model evaluation reveals sharp divergences that aggregate scores cannot expose, with no single backbone leading across consultation, drafting, and courtroom advocacy. Detailed resources will be released publicly.