AgentOrca: A Dual-System Framework to Evaluate Language Agents on Operational Routine and Constraint Adherence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.08669v1
• Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 17:53:02 GMT
• Title: AgentOrca: A Dual-System Framework to Evaluate Language Agents on Operational Routine and Constraint Adherence
• Authors: Zekun Li, Shinda Huang, Jiangtian Wang, Nathan Zhang, Antonis Antoniades, Wenyue Hua, Kaijie Zhu, Sirui Zeng, William Yang Wang, Xifeng Yan,
• Abstract summary: We present AgentOrca, a dual-system framework for evaluating language agents' compliance with operational constraints and routines.<n>Our framework encodes action constraints and routines through both natural language prompts for agents and corresponding executable code serving as ground truth for automated verification.<n>Our findings reveal notable performance gaps among state-of-the-art models, with large reasoning models like o1 demonstrating superior compliance while others show significantly lower performance.
• Score: 54.317522790545304
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As language agents progressively automate critical tasks across domains, their ability to operate within operational constraints and safety protocols becomes essential. While extensive research has demonstrated these agents' effectiveness in downstream task completion, their reliability in following operational procedures and constraints remains largely unexplored. To this end, we present AgentOrca, a dual-system framework for evaluating language agents' compliance with operational constraints and routines. Our framework encodes action constraints and routines through both natural language prompts for agents and corresponding executable code serving as ground truth for automated verification. Through an automated pipeline of test case generation and evaluation across five real-world domains, we quantitatively assess current language agents' adherence to operational constraints. Our findings reveal notable performance gaps among state-of-the-art models, with large reasoning models like o1 demonstrating superior compliance while others show significantly lower performance, particularly when encountering complex constraints or user persuasion attempts.

Related papers

• FeatureBench: Benchmarking Agentic Coding for Complex Feature Development [42.26354337364403]
  FeatureBench is a benchmark designed to evaluate agentic coding performance in end-to-end, feature-oriented software development.<n>It incorporates an execution-based evaluation protocol and a scalable test-driven method that automatically derives tasks from code repositories with minimal human effort.<n> Empirical evaluation reveals that the state-of-the-art agentic model, such as Claude 4.5 Opus, achieves a 74.4% resolved rate on SWE-bench.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-11T16:06:32Z)
• FM SO.P: A Progressive Task Mixture Framework with Automatic Evaluation for Cross-Domain SOP Understanding [19.90863270947963]
  Existing language models struggle with Standard Operating Procedures ( SOPs)<n>We propose FM SO.P, solving these challenges through two novelties.<n>First, we introduce progressive task mixtures that build capabilities by stages across three task types with cumulative data.<n>Second, we propose an automatic multi-agent evaluation system consisting of three agents that adaptively generate rubrics, stratified test sets, and scoring, adapting to domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T02:09:48Z)
• Towards a Science of Scaling Agent Systems [79.64446272302287]
  We formalize a definition for agent evaluation and characterize scaling laws as the interplay between agent quantity, coordination structure, modelic, and task properties.<n>We derive a predictive model using coordination metrics, that cross-validated R2=0, enabling prediction on unseen task domains.<n>We identify three effects: (1) a tool-coordination trade-off: under fixed computational budgets, tool-heavy tasks suffer disproportionately from multi-agent overhead, and (2) a capability saturation: coordination yields diminishing or negative returns once single-agent baselines exceed 45%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-09T06:52:21Z)
• LoCoBench-Agent: An Interactive Benchmark for LLM Agents in Long-Context Software Engineering [90.84806758077536]
  We introduce textbfLoCoBench-Agent, a comprehensive evaluation framework specifically designed to assess large language models (LLMs) agents in realistic, long-context software engineering.<n>Our framework extends LoCoBench's 8,000 scenarios into interactive agent environments, enabling systematic evaluation of multi-turn conversations.<n>Our framework provides agents with 8 specialized tools (file operations, search, code analysis) and evaluates them across context lengths ranging from 10K to 1M tokens.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-17T23:57:24Z)
• The Tool Decathlon: Benchmarking Language Agents for Diverse, Realistic, and Long-Horizon Task Execution [86.4588675093384]
  Toolathlon is a benchmark for language agents offering diverse Apps and tools, realistic environment setup, and reliable execution-based evaluation.<n>This benchmark includes 108 manually sourced or crafted tasks, requiring interacting with multiple Apps over around 20 turns on average to complete.<n>We expect Toolathlon to drive the development of more capable language agents for real-world, long-horizon task execution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-29T17:32:49Z)
• OmniEAR: Benchmarking Agent Reasoning in Embodied Tasks [52.87238755666243]
  We present OmniEAR, a framework for evaluating how language models reason about physical interactions, tool usage, and multi-agent coordination in embodied tasks.<n>We model continuous physical properties and complex spatial relationships across 1,500 scenarios spanning household and industrial domains.<n>Our systematic evaluation reveals severe performance degradation when models must reason from constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-07T17:54:15Z)
• Visual Document Understanding and Question Answering: A Multi-Agent Collaboration Framework with Test-Time Scaling [83.78874399606379]
  We propose MACT, a Multi-Agent Collaboration framework with Test-Time scaling.<n>It comprises four distinct small-scale agents, with clearly defined roles and effective collaboration.<n>It shows superior performance with a smaller parameter scale without sacrificing the ability of general and mathematical tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-05T12:52:09Z)
• SetupBench: Assessing Software Engineering Agents' Ability to Bootstrap Development Environments [2.184775414778289]
  We introduce setupbench, a benchmark that isolates the environment-bootstrap skill.<n>Our tasks span seven language ecosystems, five database engines, and multi-service orchestration scenarios.<n>We find low success rates across task categories, with particular challenges in repository setup (38.9-57.4%) and local database configuration (20.0-53.3%)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-11T22:45:07Z)
• CodeAgents: A Token-Efficient Framework for Codified Multi-Agent Reasoning in LLMs [16.234259194402163]
  We introduce CodeAgents, a prompting framework that codifies multi-agent reasoning and enables structured, token-efficient planning in multi-agent systems.<n>Results show consistent improvements in planning performance, with absolute gains of 3-36 percentage points over natural language prompting baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-04T02:20:19Z)
• SOP-Bench: Complex Industrial SOPs for Evaluating LLM Agents [16.08820954102608]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive general-purpose reasoning and problem-solving abilities.<n>LLMs struggle with executing complex, long-horizon that demand strict adherence to Standard Operating Procedures.<n>We develop SOP-Bench, a benchmark of over 1,800 tasks across 10 industrial domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T18:20:12Z)
• ThinkGeo: Evaluating Tool-Augmented Agents for Remote Sensing Tasks [54.52092001110694]
  ThinkGeo is a benchmark designed to evaluate tool-augmented agents on remote sensing tasks via structured tool use and multi-step planning.<n>Inspired by tool-interaction paradigms, ThinkGeo includes human-curated queries spanning a wide range of real-world applications.<n>Our analysis reveals notable disparities in tool accuracy and planning consistency across models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T17:59:38Z)
• AGENTIF: Benchmarking Instruction Following of Large Language Models in Agentic Scenarios [51.46347732659174]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated advanced capabilities in real-world agentic applications.<n>AgentIF is the first benchmark for systematically evaluating LLM instruction following ability in agentic scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T17:31:10Z)
• A Cooperative Multi-Agent Framework for Zero-Shot Named Entity Recognition [71.61103962200666]
  Zero-shot named entity recognition (NER) aims to develop entity recognition systems from unannotated text corpora.<n>Recent work has adapted large language models (LLMs) for zero-shot NER by crafting specialized prompt templates.<n>We introduce the cooperative multi-agent system (CMAS), a novel framework for zero-shot NER.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T23:30:43Z)
• Interactive Agents to Overcome Ambiguity in Software Engineering [61.40183840499932]
  AI agents are increasingly being deployed to automate tasks, often based on ambiguous and underspecified user instructions.<n>Making unwarranted assumptions and failing to ask clarifying questions can lead to suboptimal outcomes.<n>We study the ability of LLM agents to handle ambiguous instructions in interactive code generation settings by evaluating proprietary and open-weight models on their performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T17:12:26Z)
• AutoPT: How Far Are We from the End2End Automated Web Penetration Testing? [54.65079443902714]
  We introduce AutoPT, an automated penetration testing agent based on the principle of PSM driven by LLMs. Our results show that AutoPT outperforms the baseline framework ReAct on the GPT-4o mini model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-02T13:24:30Z)
• Compromising Embodied Agents with Contextual Backdoor Attacks [69.71630408822767]
  Large language models (LLMs) have transformed the development of embodied intelligence. This paper uncovers a significant backdoor security threat within this process. By poisoning just a few contextual demonstrations, attackers can covertly compromise the contextual environment of a black-box LLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-06T01:20:12Z)
• $τ$-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains [43.43344028212623]
  $tau$-bench is a benchmark emulating dynamic conversations between a user and a language agent. We employ an efficient and faithful evaluation process that compares the database state at the end of a conversation with the annotated goal state.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T19:33:08Z)
• Enhancing Trust in Autonomous Agents: An Architecture for Accountability and Explainability through Blockchain and Large Language Models [0.3495246564946556]
  This work presents an accountability and explainability architecture implemented for ROS-based mobile robots.<n>The proposed solution consists of two main components. Firstly, a black box-like element to provide accountability, featuring anti-tampering properties achieved through blockchain technology.<n> Secondly, a component in charge of generating natural language explanations by harnessing the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) over the data contained within the previously mentioned black box.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-14T16:57:18Z)
• AgentBoard: An Analytical Evaluation Board of Multi-turn LLM Agents [74.16170899755281]
  We introduce AgentBoard, a pioneering comprehensive benchmark and accompanied open-source evaluation framework tailored to analytical evaluation of LLM agents.<n>AgentBoard offers a fine-grained progress rate metric that captures incremental advancements as well as a comprehensive evaluation toolkit.<n>This not only sheds light on the capabilities and limitations of LLM agents but also propels the interpretability of their performance to the forefront.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T01:51:00Z)
• Language Agent Tree Search Unifies Reasoning Acting and Planning in Language Models [31.509994889286183]
  We introduce Language Agent Tree Search (LATS) -- the first general framework that synergizes the capabilities of language models (LMs) in reasoning, acting, and planning. A key feature of our approach is the incorporation of an environment for external feedback, which offers a more deliberate and adaptive problem-solving mechanism. LATS achieves state-of-the-art pass@1 accuracy (92.7%) for programming on HumanEval with GPT-4 and demonstrates gradient-free performance (average score of 75.9) comparable to gradient-based fine-tuning for web navigation on WebShop with GPT
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-06T17:55:11Z)
• Reasoning or Reciting? Exploring the Capabilities and Limitations of Language Models Through Counterfactual Tasks [71.19560970717495]
  Recent language models show impressive performance across a wide range of tasks. Are these skills general and transferable, or specialized to specific tasks seen during pretraining? We propose an evaluation framework based on "counterfactual" task variants that deviate from the default assumptions underlying standard tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-05T17:50:42Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.