SaaSBench: Exploring the Boundaries of Coding Agents in Long-Horizon Enterprise SaaS Engineering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.17526v1
• Date: Sun, 17 May 2026 16:15:56 GMT
• Title: SaaSBench: Exploring the Boundaries of Coding Agents in Long-Horizon Enterprise SaaS Engineering
• Abstract summary: We introduceBench, the first benchmark designed to explore the boundaries of AI agents in enterprise engineering.<n>It incorporates 8 programming languages, 6 databases, and 13 frameworks to meticulously mirror real-world software.<n>We show that the primary bottleneck for state-of-the-art agents is not generating isolated code logic, but successfully configuring and integrating a multi-component system.
• Score: 42.16295498118832
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As autonomous coding agents become capable of handling increasingly long-horizon tasks, they have gradually demonstrated the potential to complete end-to-end software development. Although existing benchmarks have recently evolved from localized code editing to from-scratch project generation, they remain confined to structurally simplified, single-stack applications. Consequently, they fail to capture the heterogeneous environments, full-stack orchestration, and system-level complexity of real enterprise Software as a Service (SaaS) systems, leaving a critical gap in assessing agents under realistic engineering constraints. To fill this gap, we introduce SaaSBench, the first benchmark designed to explore the boundaries of AI agents in enterprise SaaS engineering. Spanning 30 complex tasks across 6 SaaS domains with 5,370 validation nodes, it incorporates 8 programming languages, 6 databases, and 13 frameworks to meticulously mirror real-world software heterogeneity. Furthermore, we design a dependency-aware hybrid evaluation paradigm tailored for complex systems with long horizons and multi-component coupling, enabling fine-grained, reproducible assessment. Crucially, our extensive experiments reveal a striking insight: the primary bottleneck for state-of-the-art agents is not generating isolated code logic, but successfully configuring and integrating a multi-component system. Over 95\% of task failures occur before agents even reach deep business logic, with models often falling victim to overconfidence and prematurely halting during foundational system setup, or getting trapped in ineffective debugging loops. We hope SaaSBench serves as a practical and challenging testbed to drive the evolution of reliable, system-level coding agents. The code is available at \url{https://github.com/ShadeCloak/SaaSbench}.

Related papers

• From Prompt to Process: a Process Taxonomy and Comparative Assessment of Frameworks Supporting AI Software Development Agents [0.0]
  We focus on the operational frameworks that turn AI capabilities into process.<n>Each attack AI development through a different path: spec-driven development in full and lightweight variants, agent-driven agile planning, context engineering over the agent, worktree isolation and review, and recovery of operational specifications from legacy systems.<n>Our central contribution is a six-dimension process taxonomy: specification, context, roles, execution, validation and portability, with a scoring rubric that turns it into a replicable instrument.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T14:49:15Z)
• SaaS-Bench: Can Computer-Use Agents Leverage Real-World SaaS to Solve Professional Workflows? [29.5539656241093]
  Computer-Using Agents (CUAs) are rapidly extending large language models (LLMs) beyond text-based reasoning toward action execution in more complex environments.<n>Existing benchmarks often rely on simplified settings, isolated tasks, or short-horizon interactions.<n>We introduce a benchmark built on 23 deployable systems across six professional domains, containing 106 tasks grounded in realistic work scenarios.<n>Experiments show that representative LLM-based agents struggle on-Bench, with even the strongest model completing fewer than 4% of tasks end-to-end.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-15T09:35:15Z)
• EvoClaw: Evaluating AI Agents on Continuous Software Evolution [47.49468375065129]
  We introduce DeepCommit, an agentic pipeline that reconstructs verifiable Milestone DAGs from noisy commit logs.<n>These executable sequences enable EvoClaw, a novel benchmark that requires agents to sustain system integrity and limit error accumulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T03:20:40Z)
• Understanding by Reconstruction: Reversing the Software Development Process for LLM Pretraining [66.89012795621349]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle with the deep, long-horizon reasoning required for complex software engineering.<n>We propose a novel paradigm: understanding via reconstruction.<n>We introduce a framework that synthesizes latent agentic trajectories using a multi-agent simulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T09:23:20Z)
• SWE-CI: Evaluating Agent Capabilities in Maintaining Codebases via Continuous Integration [7.89414068452646]
  SWE-CI is the first repository-level benchmark built upon the Continuous Integration loop.<n>It aims to shift the evaluation paradigm for code generation from static, short-term textitfunctional correctness toward dynamic, long-term textitmaintainability
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T08:20:25Z)
• ABC-Bench: Benchmarking Agentic Backend Coding in Real-World Development [72.4729759618632]
  We introduce ABC-Bench, a benchmark to evaluate agentic backend coding within a realistic, executable workflow.<n>We curated 224 practical tasks spanning 8 languages and 19 frameworks from open-source repositories.<n>Our evaluation reveals that even state-of-the-art models struggle to deliver reliable performance on these holistic tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T08:23:52Z)
• NL2Repo-Bench: Towards Long-Horizon Repository Generation Evaluation of Coding Agents [79.29376673236142]
  Existing benchmarks fail to rigorously evaluate the long-horizon capabilities required to build complete software systems.<n>We present NL2Repo Bench, a benchmark explicitly designed to evaluate the long-horizon repository generation ability of coding agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-14T15:12:13Z)
• SWE-Compass: Towards Unified Evaluation of Agentic Coding Abilities for Large Language Models [59.90381306452982]
  evaluating large language models (LLMs) for software engineering has been limited by narrow task coverage, language bias, and insufficient alignment with real-world developer.<n>We introduce SWE-1, a comprehensive benchmark that unifies heterogeneous code-related evaluations into a structured and production-aligned framework.<n>SWE- spans 8 task types, 8 programming scenarios, and 10 programming languages, with 2000 high-quality instances curated from authentic GitHub pull requests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-07T18:01:32Z)
• UltraHorizon: Benchmarking Agent Capabilities in Ultra Long-Horizon Scenarios [63.67884284105684]
  We introduce textbfUltraHorizon, a novel benchmark that measures the foundational capabilities essential for complex real-world challenges.<n>Agents are designed in long-horizon discovery tasks where they must iteratively uncover hidden rules.<n>Our experiments reveal that LLM-agents consistently underperform in these settings, whereas human participants achieve higher scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T02:04:00Z)
• SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks? [13.645265361867565]
  SWE-Bench Pro builds upon the best practices of SWE-BENCH [25], but is explicitly designed to capture realistic, complex, enterprise-level problems.<n>The benchmark is partitioned into a public set with open access to problems sourced from 11 repositories, a held-out set of 12 repositories and a commercial set of 18 proprietary repositories.<n>In our evaluation of widely used coding models, under a unified scaffold, we observe that their performance on SWE-Bench PRO remains below 25% (Pass@1), with GPT-5 achieving the highest score to date at 23.3%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-21T06:28:17Z)

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.