mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Who Belongs in the Eval Set? A Capability-Taxonomy-Driven Pipeline for Curating Regression Eval Sets in Agent-Extensibility Platforms

arXiv 2608.01004 ↗First posted 2 Aug 2026cs.LG cs.AI cs.SEcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Platform teams hosting agent-extensibility surfaces face a regression-economics paradox: every onboarding customer ships an evaluation set tuned to their domain, but the platform's regression set must live under a hard query-count ceiling bounded by release cadence. To our knowledge, no published industrial pipeline addresses this platform-side curation problem: existing evaluation frameworks are customer-side, and benchmark-compression work treats benchmarks as fixed pools rather than streams of incoming sets. We describe a capability-taxonomy-driven curation pipeline applied to declarative agents with custom actions in Microsoft 365 Copilot. It takes an agent specification and a customer's eval set as input, projects each query into a platform-owned capability taxonomy, and outputs per-query decisions (admit, drop, swap, or human review), under the philosophy that a healthy regression set is the minimal set of queries capturing the maximal spread of capability signatures -- distinct combinations of capabilities a query exercises together. Three components instantiate this: a classifier producing per-(query, capability) verdicts via a hybrid of deterministic specification-based extraction and large-language-model (LLM) semantic inference; an Invocation Quality (IQ) rater scoring how thoroughly a query exercises each capability, so a new query sharing a signature with an existing entry can still be recognized as a better test and displace it; and a consolidator comparing incoming queries against the regression set on coverage and quality through a rule-based decision cascade, backed by a conservative curator that only suggests evictions. The mechanism is taxonomy-agnostic and applies to any regression eval-set curation problem with a typed capability taxonomy, including taxonomies that evolve in response to the very evidence the pipeline surfaces.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (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 2 of its 13 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Aug 2026.

Builds on

2 of 13 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Holistic Agent Leaderboard: The Missing Infrastructure for AI Agent Evaluation13 Oct

Other references · 1

  1. 2024tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examplescited by 295

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026AlphaEval: Evaluating Agents in Production
  2. 2026PACE: A Proxy for Agentic Capability Evaluation
  3. 2024Evaluation-Driven Development and Operations of LLM Agents: A Process Model and Reference Architecture
  4. 2026Beyond Static Leaderboards: Predictive Validity for the Evaluation of LLM Agents
  5. 2026Evaluating Skills, Not Just Agents: Agentic Continuous Evaluation of Skills
  6. 2026Diagnosing Tool-Selection Reasoning in LLM Agents with Canary Tools
  7. 2026Layer-Isolated Evaluation: Gating the Deterministic Scaffold of a Production LLM Agent with a No-LLM, Regression-Locked Test Harness
  8. 2026LiveMACE: Process-Aware Evaluation of LLM Agent Capabilities in Evolving Markets