Benchmark Almanac

AgentDojo

Grok 4 Fast 0% leads since Sep 2025 In use

Agents do tool-use tasks while tools and data carry prompt injections. Attack success rate counts hijacked runs.

Labs also report utility under attack. xAI reports attack success rate only. Task suites are versioned from v1 to v1.2.2 (added 2025-10-27) with task fixes, and lab reports rarely say which suite version they ran.

In the authors’ words

AI agents aim to solve complex tasks by combining text-based reasoning with external tool calls. Unfortunately, AI agents are vulnerable to prompt injection attacks where data returned by external tools hijacks the agent to execute malicious tasks. To measure the adversarial robustness of AI agents, we introduce AgentDojo, an evaluation framework for agents that execute tools over untrusted data. To capture the evolving nature of attacks and defenses, AgentDojo is not a static test suite, but rather an extensible environment for designing and evaluating new agent tasks, defenses, and adaptive attacks. We populate the environment with 97 realistic tasks (e.g., managing an email client, navigating an e-banking website, or making travel bookings), 629 security test cases, and various attack and defense paradigms from the literature. We find that AgentDojo poses a challenge for both attacks and defenses: state-of-the-art LLMs fail at many tasks (even in the absence of attacks), and existing prompt injection attacks break some security properties but not all. We hope that AgentDojo can foster research on new design principles for AI agents that solve common tasks in a reliable and robust manner.. We release the code for AgentDojo at https://github.com/ethz-spylab/agentdojo.

Abstract of AgentDojo: A Dynamic Environment to Evaluate Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses for LLM Agents (arXiv:2406.13352, CC0)
Made by ETH Zurich SPY Lab + Invariant Labs Released Jun 2024 Jailbreaks and prompt injection All tasks public Last in a launch post Aug 2026 Last model added Oct 2026 Scores refreshed 2 Nov 2026
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Agent task Many steps in a terminal, browser, desktop, app, game or robot.
7
Models scored in lab cards
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab
7
System cards report it, from 2 labs

Grok 4 Fast leads with 0% among models released by Aug 2026

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

The newest model with a score here came out in Aug 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Grok 4 Fast 0%
  2. 2 Muse Spark 1.1 0.70%
  3. 3 Grok 4 2.00%
  4. 4 Grok 4.1 5.00%
  5. 5 Muse Spark 11.7%
  6. 6 grok-code-fast-1 26.9%
  7. 7 Muse Glimmer 28.4%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Grok 4 Fast 0% Sep 2025 Model card
2 Muse Spark 1.1 0.70% Jul 2026 Model card
3 Grok 4 2.00% Aug 2025 Model card
4 Grok 4.1 5.00% Nov 2025 Model card
5 Muse Spark 11.7% Jun 2026 Model card
6 grok-code-fast-1 26.9% Aug 2025 Model card
7 Muse Glimmer 28.4% Aug 2026 Model card

The benchmark's own leaderboard has 20 models. We plot every source in the charts below.

2 models have held number one since its release in Jun 2024

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.

Cohere Anthropic xAI
Own leaderboard Not tested since Feb 2025
Lab claims 2 leaders

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

On the benchmark’s own leaderboard Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Muse Spark 1.1 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024) Command R (03-2024) Claude 3 Haiku GPT-4 Turbo (Jan 2024) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2024 2025 2026 Muse Spark 1.1 Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024)

One lab put it in a launch post in the last six months

Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.

Meta
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
10 Aug 2026 Muse Glimmer 28.4 Siren AgentDojo Attack Success Rate 28.4 (lower is better), Utility 94.2

7 system cards report it, from 2 labs

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
19 Oct 2026 Muse Glimmer technical report 28.4 Siren AgentDojo ASR@5, lower is better, utility 94.2, high (Tables 2 and 5) Robustness
9 Jul 2026 Muse Spark 1.1 system card 0.7 AgentDojo pass@1 ASR with SIREN attacker (Table 2, Figure 28) Robustness
12 Jun 2026 Muse Spark system card 11.7 AgentDojo pass@1 ASR with SIREN attacker (Table 2, Figure 34) Robustness
17 Nov 2025 Grok 4.1 model card 5 AgentDojo, attack success rate 0.05, Grok 4.1 Thinking (Table 1) Robustness
19 Sep 2025 Grok 4 Fast model card 0 AgentDojo, attack success rate 0.00, 0.03 non-reasoning (Table 1) Robustness
26 Aug 2025 grok-code-fast-1 model card 26.9 AgentDojo, attack success rate 26.9 (Table 1) Robustness
20 Aug 2025 Grok 4 model card 2 AgentDojo, attack success rate 0.02, Grok 4 API (Table 1) Robustness

More in Safety and alignment

All 444 in Safety and alignment
  • FORTRESS In use Paired adversarial and benign national-security misuse prompts. Rubric-graded risk score on adversarial and over-refusal score on benign prompts. Claude Opus 5.5 5.78%
  • StrongREJECT In use Forbidden-prompt jailbreak benchmark with a rubric grader that scores how useful a non-refusal actually is. Inkling 98.6%
  • MASK In use Measures whether a model contradicts its own elicited beliefs under pressure to lie. Honesty separated from accuracy. Muse Spark Open 98.1%
  • Gray Swan IPI Arena benchmark In use Indirect prompt-injection attacks from public red-teaming competitions replayed on tool, coding and browser agents. Attack success rate at k attempts. GPT-6 Astra 8.50%
  • Agentic misalignment suite (Anthropic) In use Agents in simulated company settings face threats or goal conflicts that invite blackmail, leaking or sabotage. Score is the misaligned action rate. Claude Sonnet 4.5 0%
  • StrongREJECT v2 (Meta) In use Models face a cascade of jailbreak attacks on disallowed behaviors adapted from StrongREJECT plus internal ones. Reports attack success rate. Muse Spark 1.1 0.50%