AgencyBench
Agents complete 138 long tasks drawn from daily AI use, grouped into 32 scenarios that cover six agentic capabilities such as coding, front-end work, game development and research. A typical task takes about 90 tool calls, 1 million tokens and hours of work. A simulated user gives feedback during the run, and a Docker sandbox checks the deliverables against task rubrics.
This is AgencyBench V2. A 10-task V1 came out in 2025-09. Front-end and game tasks are graded by text and vision model judges in a remote VM. About 105 GitHub stars and 35 Hugging Face upvotes.
- Released
- January 2026
- Kind
- Long terminal sessions
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Graded by a model
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-5.2 #50 on the capability index
- Last model added
- December 2025
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
Large Language Models (LLMs) based autonomous agents demonstrate multifaceted capabilities to contribute substantially to economic production. However, existing benchmarks remain focused on single agentic capability, failing to capture long-horizon real-world scenarios. Moreover, the reliance on human-in-the-loop feedback for realistic tasks creates a scalability bottleneck, hindering automated rollout collection and evaluation. To bridge this gap, we introduce AgencyBench, a comprehensive benchmark derived from daily AI usage, evaluating 6 core agentic capabilities across 32 real-world scenarios, comprising 138 tasks with specific queries, deliverables, and rubrics. These scenarios require an average of 90 tool calls, 1 million tokens, and hours of execution time to resolve. To enable automated evaluation, we employ a user simulation agent to provide iterative feedback, and a Docker sandbox to conduct visual and functional rubric-based assessment. Experiments reveal that closed-source models significantly outperform open-source models (48.4% vs 32.1%). Further analysis reveals significant disparities across models in resource efficiency, feedback-driven self-correction, and specific tool-use preferences. Finally, we investigate the impact of agentic scaffolds, observing that proprietary models demonstrate superior performance within their native ecosystems (e.g., Claude-4.5-Opus via Claude-Agent-SDK), while open-source models exhibit distinct performance peaks, suggesting potential optimization for specific execution frameworks. AgencyBench serves as a critical testbed for next-generation agents, highlighting the necessity of co-optimizing model architecture with agentic frameworks. We believe this work sheds light on the future direction of autonomous agents, and we release the full benchmark and evaluation toolkit at https://github.com/GAIR-NLP/AgencyBench.
GPT-5.2 leads with 56.5% among models released by December 2025
Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.
The newest model with a score here came out in December 2025, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 1 GPT-5.2 56.5%
- 2 Claude Opus 4.5 47.7%
- 3
Gemini 3 Pro 46.9%
- 4 Claude Sonnet 4.5 46.4%
- 5 Grok 4.1 Fast 44.3%
- 6 GLM-4.6 38.6%
- 7 Kimi K2 Thinking 34.2%
- 8
DeepSeek-V3.2 28.6%
- 9
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking Jul 2025 27%
Source: Official AgencyBench leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5.2 | 56.5% | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | Claude Opus 4.5 | 47.7% | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | | 46.9% | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | 46.4% | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | Grok 4.1 Fast | 44.3% | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | GLM-4.6 | 38.6% | Sep 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | Kimi K2 Thinking | 34.2% | Nov 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 28.6% | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 27% | Jul 2025 | Official leaderboard |
Number one over time
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official AgencyBench leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Source: Official AgencyBench leaderboard
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
More in Terminal agents
- SkillsBench In use 86-87 containerized expert tasks in 11 domains, run with and without Agent Skills. Verifier tests give pass rate and skill lift. GPT-5.5 67.3%
- Terminal-Bench Hard In use Agents complete 44 hard tasks from Terminal-Bench Core in the Terminus 2 harness. Artificial Analysis scores pass@1 averaged over 3 repeats.
Gemma 4 31B IT 36%
- Harbor-Index In use Agents solve about 80 hard tasks drawn from 29 benchmarks run through Harbor adapters, such as HLE, GSO and SWE-bench Pro. Each task keeps its source verifier. GPT-5.5 28.1%
- Terminal-Bench 2.1 Extended Not in model cards Agents complete long command-line tasks in containers, scored by verification tests. Mercor adds 99 new expert-written tasks to the 89 public ones and reports both scores.
Muse Wonder 54%
- Terminal-Bench 4.1 Not in model cards The Terminal-Bench 4.0 tasks with hardened verifiers: agents complete 66 hard tasks in containerized terminals across software, ML, science, security, and operations. Test scripts verify each result, scored as resolution rate. Claude Opus 5.5 65.8%
- o11y-bench Not in model cards Agents query metrics, logs and traces in a live Grafana stack, investigate incidents and fix dashboards. Grading checks claims against facts read from the same environment. Claude Opus 5.5 93.8%