Benchmark Almanac

AgentHarm

Fara-7B 94.2% leads since Nov 2025 Only in system cards

110 malicious agent tasks with synthetic tools. Measures refusal and harmful task completion, plus benign controls.

Implemented in Inspect Evals. Part of the test set is private.

In the authors’ words

The robustness of LLMs to jailbreak attacks, where users design prompts to circumvent safety measures and misuse model capabilities, has been studied primarily for LLMs acting as simple chatbots. Meanwhile, LLM agents – which use external tools and can execute multi-stage tasks – may pose a greater risk if misused, but their robustness remains underexplored. To facilitate research on LLM agent misuse, we propose a new benchmark called AgentHarm. The benchmark includes a diverse set of 110 explicitly malicious agent tasks (440 with augmentations), covering 11 harm categories including fraud, cybercrime, and harassment. In addition to measuring whether models refuse harmful agentic requests, scoring well on AgentHarm requires jailbroken agents to maintain their capabilities following an attack to complete a multi-step task. We evaluate a range of leading LLMs, and find (1) leading LLMs are surprisingly compliant with malicious agent requests without jailbreaking, (2) simple universal jailbreak templates can be adapted to effectively jailbreak agents, and (3) these jailbreaks enable coherent and malicious multi-step agent behavior and retain model capabilities. To enable simple and reliable evaluation of attacks and defenses for LLM-based agents, we publicly release AgentHarm at https://huggingface.co/datasets/ai-safety-institute/AgentHarm.

Abstract of AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents (arXiv:2410.09024, CC0)
Made by Gray Swan AI + UK AI Security Institute Released Oct 2024 Refusing harmful requests Public tasks plus a private test set Last in a system card Jun 2026 Last model added Jun 2026
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.
6
Models scored in lab cards
6
System cards report it, from 3 labs

Fara-7B leads with 94.2% among models released by Apr 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 Apr 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 Fara-7B 94.2%
  2. 2 Muse Spark 26%
  3. 3 grok-code-fast-1 17%
  4. 4 Grok 4 14%
  5. 5 Grok 4.1 14%
  6. 6 Grok 4 Fast 8.00%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Fara-7B 94.2% Nov 2025 Model card
2 Muse Spark 26% Jun 2026 Model card
3 grok-code-fast-1 17% Aug 2025 Model card
4 Grok 4 14% Aug 2025 Model card
5 Grok 4.1 14% Nov 2025 Model card
6 Grok 4 Fast 8.00% Sep 2025 Model card

3 models have held number one since its release in Oct 2024

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.

xAI Other labs Microsoft
Lab claims Passed 85% in Nov 2025, by Fara-7B
Fara-7B 94.2%

The best score passed 85% in Nov 2025

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

Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Fara-7B grok-code-fast-1 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Fara-7B grok-code-fast-1

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

6 system cards report it, from 3 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
12 Jun 2026 Muse Spark system card 26 AgentHarm score (Table 2, Figure 32). Benign subset FRR 6.8 Robustness
24 Nov 2025 Fara-7B technical report 94.2 AgentHarm-Chat, harmful tasks safely refused (Table 14) Safety
17 Nov 2025 Grok 4.1 model card 14 AgentHarm, answer rate 0.14, no jailbreak, Grok 4.1 Thinking (Table 1) Safety
19 Sep 2025 Grok 4 Fast model card 8 AgentHarm, answer rate 0.08, no attack, 0.10 non-reasoning (Table 1) Safety
26 Aug 2025 grok-code-fast-1 model card 17 AgentHarm, answer rate 17.0 (Table 1) Safety
20 Aug 2025 Grok 4 model card 14 AgentHarm, answer rate 0.14, no attack, Grok 4 API (Table 1) Safety

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%
  • AgentDojo In use Agents do tool-use tasks while tools and data carry prompt injections. Attack success rate counts hijacked runs. Grok 4 Fast 0%
  • 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%