# Root-Cause Attribution Is a Search Problem: Continual Search for Long-Horizon Agent Failures

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.13463 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.13463/

## 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 31 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 Sep 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, 30 of 31)

- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12045/) (2024)
- [GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistants](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12983/) (2023)
- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09251/) (2022)
- [BrowseComp: A Simple Yet Challenging Benchmark for Browsing Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.12516/) (2025)
- [Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.11868/) (2026)
- [Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22954/) (2025)
- [Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.18796/) (2024)
- [Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.10934/) (2024)
- [AssistantBench: Can Web Agents Solve Realistic and Time-Consuming Tasks?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.15711/) (2024)
- [Context Length Alone Hurts LLM Performance Despite Perfect Retrieval](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.05381/) (2025)
- [TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.08638/) (2025)
- [Agent-R: Training Language Model Agents to Reflect via Iterative Self-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.11425/) (2025)
- [Are You Sure? Challenging LLMs Leads to Performance Drops in The FlipFlop Experiment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08596/) (2023)
- [DeepSWE: Measuring Frontier Coding Agents on Original, Long-Horizon Engineering Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.07946/) (2026)
- [Gaia2: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Dynamic and Asynchronous Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.11964/) (2026)
- [Nine Judges, Two Effective Votes: Correlated Errors Undermine LLM Evaluation Panels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.29800/) (2026)
- [Challenging the Evaluator: LLM Sycophancy Under User Rebuttal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.16533/) (2025)
- [Who&When Pro: Can LLMs Really Attribute Failures in AI Agents?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.09996/) (2026)
- [LongHorizon-Harness: Advancing Long-Horizon Agents for Real-World Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.01964/) (2026)
- [Remember When It Matters: Proactive Memory Agent for Long-Horizon Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.08716/) (2026)
- [When Agents Commit Too Soon: Diagnosing Premature Commitment in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.22936/) (2026)
- [Model or Harness? An Interaction-Centric Taxonomy for Localizing Agent Failures](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.28802/) (2026)
- [TRAJDEBUG: Tracing Error Lifecycle to Identify Critical Failures in Long-Horizon Agent Trajectories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.06346/) (2026)
- [Learning from Failure: Inference-Time Self-Improvement for Computer-Use Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.31270/) (2026)
- [Stability vs. Manipulability: Evaluating Robustness Under Post-Decision Interaction in LLM Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.05384/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The increasing deployment of AI agents in long-horizon tasks yields massive execution logs. Diagnosing failures within these records is crucial for reliability, as it transforms outcome-level signals into actionable interventions. The sheer scale of the data renders human review impractical, driving the need for automated root-cause attribution (RCA). However, automated RCA methods using LLMs suffer from low diagnostic accuracy, especially as execution traces grow larger. They struggle because relevant information is often sparse, distributed across distant actions, and disconnected from the visible failure, reducing root-cause attribution to a massive search problem. Existing RCA methods typically rely on one-shot LLM judgments to diagnose failures from execution traces. While effective for shorter trajectories, these judges tend to settle on a plausible diagnosis early, leaving critical evidence in longer traces unexamined. We introduce Continual Search, an iterative framework that nudges the judge, over successive turns, to keep searching for unresolved diagnostic evidence. We evaluate Continual Search across four existing RCA benchmarks. Recognizing the lack of massive execution traces in current benchmarks, we introduce MegaRCA-Mix to evaluate RCA at scale. MegaRCA-Mix provides a challenging testbed of 50 human-annotated failure trials spanning long-horizon, execution-heavy tasks. Across multiple benchmark suites and model families, Continual Search consistently improves attribution performance. On MegaRCA-Mix, for example, it improves Opus-4.8's F1 score by 29%, from 0.471 to 0.608. More interestingly, within the same model family, lower-tier models can even surpass their higher-tier counterparts, demonstrating that effective search supersedes raw model scale.