mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On the Clock: Towards Punctual and Productive Time-Budgeted AI Agents

arXiv 2610.10833 ↗First posted 7 Oct 2026cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

New in LLM agents and tool use; no direction yet. LLM agents and tool use

Abstract (arXiv)

We study whether small LLM agents can operate effectively under explicit wall-clock time budgets by both respecting the allocated runtime and using available time productively. We evaluate Qwen3.6-27B on five competitions from MLE-Bench Lite and Qwen3-4B on Zork I (Jericho), two agentic benchmarks where additional computational time can meaningfully improve performance. In the simplest setting, where the budget is stated only in the prompt, agents fail to translate the stated budget into controlled use of time. These failures arise from gaps in time awareness, since the harness provides no timing feedback, but also because they cannot reliably anticipate the duration of actions, and do not have a learned mapping from available time to an appropriate strategy. We investigate two complementary classes of interventions: harness-based mechanisms that expose timing information and enforce deadlines, and reinforcement learning with budget-aware rewards. Injecting timing information through the harness substantially improves budget adherence for Qwen3.6-27B without measurable loss in performance, while enforcement hooks tighten adherence further. RL with GRPO achieves near-perfect budget adherence on Zork I and generalizes to held-out budgets not seen during training, but does not improve task performance over the untrained harness on MLE-Bench. Once agents are made to respect the budget, they still fail to use additional time to improve task performance. RL-trained policies learn when to stop but often fill extra time with repeated actions, and GRPO training on multiple budgets tends to collapse toward the strategy learned for the shortest budget. Our results reveal a gap between time adherence and productive time allocation, which remains a central challenge for budget-conditioned agents.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2026.

Builds on

10 of 16 references.

References · 10

  1. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  2. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  3. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,146
  4. 2024Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameterscited by 1,928
  5. 2024MLE-bench: Evaluating Machine Learning Agents on Machine Learning Engineeringcited by 429
  6. 2025Learning When to Plan: Efficiently Allocating Test-Time Compute for LLM Agentscited by 18
  7. 2026BAGEN: Are LLM Agents Budget-Aware?cited by 12
  8. 2026Spend Less, Reason Better: Budget-Aware Value Tree Search for LLM Agentscited by 10
  9. 2023Anytime-Constrained Reinforcement Learningcited by 5
  10. 2026Timely Machine: Awareness of Time Makes Test-Time Scaling Agenticcited by 5

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026AgentTime: Can Agents Estimate and Control Their Own Runtime?
  2. 2025Learning to Wait: Synchronizing Agents with the Physical World
  3. 2026An Architecture for Long-Horizon Agents: Levels, Ticks and Cascaded Intelligence
  4. 2026ContextBudget: Budget-Aware Context Management for Long-Horizon Search Agents
  5. 2025Budget-Aware Tool Use Enables Effective Agent Scaling
  6. 2026textttYC-Bench: Benchmarking AI Agents for Long-Term Planning and Consistent Execution
  7. 2026Beyond Token Savings: A Systematic Study of Context Compression in LLM Agents
  8. 2026ZEBRA: Zero-shot Budgeted Resource Allocation for LLM Orchestration