# OpenHarmony Bench: Evaluating LLMs and Coding Agents on OpenHarmony App Development

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.16022 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.16022/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 25 of its 35 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Aug 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Software engineering coding agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/software-engineering-coding-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.15793/) (2024)
- [Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPS](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.09938/) (2021)
- [CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.04664/) (2021)
- [BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.15877/) (2024)
- [AndroidWorld: A Dynamic Benchmarking Environment for Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14573/) (2024)
- [DS-1000: A Natural and Reliable Benchmark for Data Science Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.11501/) (2022)
- [Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.01489/) (2024)
- [Android in the Wild: A Large-Scale Dataset for Android Device Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.10088/) (2023)
- [Mobile-Agent: Autonomous Multi-Modal Mobile Device Agent with Visual Perception](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.16158/) (2024)
- [SWE-bench Multimodal: Do AI Systems Generalize to Visual Software Domains?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.03859/) (2024)
- [Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.02605/) (2025)
- [SPA-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for SmartPhone Agent Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.15164/) (2024)
- [Mobile-Bench: An Evaluation Benchmark for LLM-based Mobile Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.00993/) (2024)
- [Benchmarking Mobile Device Control Agents across Diverse Configurations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.16660/) (2024)
- [DesignBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for MLLM-based Front-end Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.06251/) (2025)
- [WebCoderBench: Benchmarking Web Application Generation with Comprehensive and Interpretable Evaluation Metrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.02430/) (2026)
- [You Don't Know Until You Click:Automated GUI Testing for Production-Ready Software Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.14104/) (2025)
- [WebApp1K: A Practical Code-Generation Benchmark for Web App Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00019/) (2024)
- [SWE-Compass: Towards Unified Evaluation of Agentic Coding Abilities for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.05459/) (2025)
- [PlayCoder: Making LLM-Generated GUI Code Playable](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.19742/) (2026)
- [Pairwise GUI Dataset Construction Between Android Phones and Tablets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.04755/) (2023)
- [Source-Free Detection and Impact Analysis of Compiler Optimization Problems in Mobile Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.23512/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We present OPENHARMONY BENCH, an app-level coding benchmark for evaluating LLM-based coding agents on OpenHarmony ArkTS applications. Unlike function-level benchmarks, it evaluates complete app-level changes: each task requires an agent to modify a buildable ArkTS project so that a requested behavior works end to end, involving UI state, data persistence, build configuration, and platform APIs. The benchmark installs and drives the delivered application on a device to check whether the behavior is observable. It covers three input sources: natural-language feature requests (new-feature), structured scenario specifications (spec-driven), and bug descriptions (bug-fix). The benchmark contains 153 top-level tasks and 242 Feature points (F-points), where an F-point is one executable behavior check. The snapshot includes 32 new-feature tasks, 50 spec-driven tasks with 139 F-points, and 71 bug-fix tasks. The main leaderboard is scored over top-level tasks rather than independently weighted F-points. We describe the benchmark construction, statistics, and build-and-test evaluation pipeline, and evaluate DevEco Code with eight LLMs across three independent full-suite runs per configuration. Three findings emerge. First, newer generations complete more tasks than their predecessors within evaluated model-family pairs. Second, buildability is close to saturated while behavioral correctness is not: mean Final Build Success Rate is 94.77% to 100.00%, whereas mean Task Completion is 48.36% to 58.39%. Third, spec-driven tasks have the lowest Task Completion under all-checks task scoring, with no configuration exceeding 35%. The code, data, tasks, reference solutions, tests, evaluation scripts, and leaderboard are released through the official OPENHARMONY BENCH website at https://bench.matrix.openharmony.cn/.