mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Harness-IF: Evaluating Instruction Following Across Instruction Surfaces in Coding Agents

arXiv 2608.11727 ↗First posted 12 Aug 2026cs.AIcited by 4

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

Abstract (arXiv)

When a coding agent obeys a rule, it may simply have been going to do that anyway. Existing instruction-following benchmarks cannot tell the difference: they concentrate rules in the user turn, while coding-agent benchmarks emphasize final task success. We introduce Harness-IF, which scores operational rules one at a time from execution evidence: 60 realistic multi-turn coding items drawn from a 642-rule library, 256 rules receiving verdicts, placed on the five configurable surfaces a deployed agent reads. To separate compliance from coincidence we introduce Against-Prior Accuracy (AP-Acc), which scores only rules labeled as opposing unprompted defaults, observed by re-running tasks with the rule withheld across nine probe builds and curated otherwise. Across 12 frontier models, accuracy spans 72.1-85.9% and AP-Acc 66.1-78.6%; every model is worse on against-prior rules, by 3.6 to 7.4 points (mean 5.81), and the direction survives a common-support analysis with item-clustered intervals. Aggregate scores therefore overstate compliance by a model-specific margin: prior control leaves the top build unchanged and exchanges three adjacent rank pairs. A counterbalanced conflict pilot on nine separate builds adds a second result: pooled precedence does not follow prompt depth, with system prompts, project files, and user instructions ahead of tool and skill descriptions.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 37 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Aug 2026.

Builds on

37 of 55 references.

Closest ancestors · 4

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026SpecBench: Measuring Reward Hacking in Long-Horizon Coding Agents20 May
  2. 2026ProcCtrlBench: Evaluating Process-Level Defects and Control Preservation in LLM Coding Agents18 May
  3. 2024AppWorld: A Controllable World of Apps and People for Benchmarking Interactive Coding Agents26 Jul
  4. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May

Other references · 33

  1. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
  2. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  3. 2023WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agentscited by 2,006
  4. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,402
  5. 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,386
  6. 2023Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIscited by 1,332
  7. 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agentscited by 1,267
  8. 2023Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Modelscited by 1,228
  9. 2024OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environmentscited by 1,195
  10. 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,128
  11. 2025OpenAI GPT-5 System Cardcited by 989
  12. 2025τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environmentcited by 627
21 more
  1. 2026Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfacescited by 585
  2. 2024The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructionscited by 493
  3. 2024MLE-bench: Evaluating Machine Learning Agents on Machine Learning Engineeringcited by 469
  4. 2023MLAgentBench: Evaluating Language Agents on Machine Learning Experimentationcited by 366
  5. 2025PaperBench: Evaluating AI's Ability to Replicate AI Researchcited by 321
  6. 2025SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?cited by 279
  7. 2024SWE-bench Multimodal: Do AI Systems Generalize to Visual Software Domains?cited by 203
  8. 2025Generalizing Verifiable Instruction Followingcited by 194
  9. 2024Benchmarking Complex Instruction-Following with Multiple Constraints Compositioncited by 152
  10. 2024InFoBench: Evaluating Instruction Following Ability in Large Language Modelscited by 135
  11. 2023FollowBench: A Multi-level Fine-grained Constraints Following Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 117
  12. 2024Multi-IF: Benchmarking LLMs on Multi-Turn and Multilingual Instructions Followingcited by 102
  13. 2024CFBench: A Comprehensive Constraints-Following Benchmark for LLMscited by 67
  14. 2025IHEval: Evaluating Language Models on Following the Instruction Hierarchycited by 53
  15. 2025AGENTIF: Benchmarking Instruction Following of Large Language Models in Agentic Scenarioscited by 49
  16. 2026Step 3.5 Flash: Open Frontier-Level Intelligence with 11B Active Parameterscited by 36
  17. 2024LIFBench: Evaluating the Instruction Following Performance and Stability of Large Language Models in Long-Context Scenarioscited by 33
  18. 2026Model Context Protocol (MCP) Tool Descriptions Are Smelly! Towards Improving AI Agent Efficiency with Augmented MCP Tool Descriptionscited by 17
  19. 2025CodeIF-Bench: Evaluating Instruction-Following Capabilities of Large Language Models in Interactive Code Generationcited by 15
  20. 2025EIFBENCH: Extremely Complex Instruction Following Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 9
  21. 2026OpenSkillEval: Automatically Auditing the Open Skill Ecosystem for LLM Agentscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Guardrails Beat Guidance: A Large-Scale Study of Rules, Skills, and Persistent Configuration for Coding Agents
  2. 2026The Scaffold Effect in Coding Agents: Harness Choice as a Hidden Variable in Coding-Agent Evaluation
  3. 2026AgentGuard: Learning Execution Guardrails from Anomalous Coding-Agent Trajectories
  4. 2026OctoBench: Benchmarking Scaffold-Aware Instruction Following in Repository-Grounded Agentic Coding
  5. 2026An Empirical Study of Harness Design for Coding Agents
  6. 2026Learning When and How to Intervene: A Hindsight-Distilled Sentinel for Coding Agents
  7. 2026MTAC-IFBench: Benchmarking Instruction-Following in Multi-Turn Agentic Coding
  8. 2026EvoCode-Bench: Evaluating Coding Agents in Multi-Turn Iterative Interactions