GTA
Agents answer 229 human-written queries that need 1 to 4 real deployed tools for perception, operation, logic and creativity, often with image inputs. Queries leave the tools and steps implicit.
NeurIPS 2024 Datasets and Benchmarks. The maintainers updated the board in 2025-03 and 2026-02. GTA-2 keeps this set as GTA-Atomic.
In the authors’ words
Significant focus has been placed on integrating large language models (LLMs) with various tools in developing general-purpose agents. This poses a challenge to LLMs' tool-use capabilities. However, there are evident gaps between existing tool-use evaluations and real-world scenarios. Current evaluations often use AI-generated queries, single-step tasks, dummy tools, and text-only interactions, failing to reveal the agents' real-world problem-solving abilities effectively. To address this, we propose GTA, a benchmark for General Tool Agents, featuring three main aspects: (i) Real user queries: human-written queries with simple real-world objectives but implicit tool-use, requiring the LLM to reason the suitable tools and plan the solution steps. (ii) Real deployed tools: an evaluation platform equipped with tools across perception, operation, logic, and creativity categories to evaluate the agents' actual task execution performance. (iii) Real multimodal inputs: authentic image files, such as spatial scenes, web page screenshots, tables, code snippets, and printed/handwritten materials, used as the query contexts to align with real-world scenarios closely. We design 229 real-world tasks and executable tool chains to evaluate mainstream LLMs. Our findings show that real-world user queries are challenging for existing LLMs, with GPT-4 completing less than 50% of the tasks and most LLMs achieving below 25%. This evaluation reveals the bottlenecks in the tool-use capabilities of current LLMs in real-world scenarios, which provides future direction for advancing general-purpose tool agents. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/open-compass/GTA.
- 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.
GPT-4 Turbo leads with 46.6% among models released by May 2024
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.
The newest model with a score here came out in May 2024, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 46.6 GPT-4 Turbo
- 41.5 GPT-4o
- 23.6 GPT-3.5 Turbo
- 23.4 Claude 3 Opus
- 17.1
Mistral Large
- 13.3
Qwen1.5-72B
- 12.4
Qwen1.5-14B-Chat
- 10.6
Qwen1.5-7B-Chat
- 9.77
Mixtral 8x7B
- 9.51
DeepSeek LLM 67B
- 8.32
Llama 3-70B
- 7.37
Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.1
- 4.00 deepseek-llm-7b-chat
- 3.21
Yi-34B
- 3.10
Llama 3-8B
- 0.58
Yi-6B-Chat
- 1 GPT-4 Turbo Nov 2023 46.6%
- 2 GPT-4o May 2024 41.5%
- 3 GPT-3.5 Turbo Jan 2024 23.6%
- 4 Claude 3 Opus 23.4%
- 5
Mistral Large 17.1%
- 6
Qwen1.5-72B 13.3%
- 7
Qwen1.5-14B-Chat 12.4%
- 8
Qwen1.5-7B-Chat 10.6%
- 9
Mixtral 8x7B 9.77%
- 10
DeepSeek LLM 67B 9.51%
- 11
Llama 3-70B 8.32%
- 12
Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.1 7.37%
- 13 deepseek-llm-7b-chat 4.00%
- 14
Yi-34B 3.21%
- 15
Llama 3-8B 3.10%
- 16
Yi-6B-Chat 0.58%
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-4 Turbo Nov 2023 | 46.6% | Nov 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | GPT-4o May 2024 | 41.5% | May 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | GPT-3.5 Turbo Jan 2024 | 23.6% | Jan 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Claude 3 Opus | 23.4% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | | 17.1% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | | 13.3% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | | 12.4% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | | 10.6% | Feb 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | | 9.77% | Dec 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | | 9.51% | Nov 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | | 8.32% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | | 7.37% | Sep 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | deepseek-llm-7b-chat | 4.00% | Jul 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | | 3.21% | Nov 2023 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | | 3.10% | Apr 2024 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | | 0.58% | Nov 2023 | Official leaderboard |
Number one over time
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
Versions
More in Tool use
- AutomationBench In use Agent completes end-to-end business workflows inside a simulated company exposing dozens of REST APIs. Graded on resulting state.
Gemini 4 Carbon 53.9%
- MCP Atlas In use Multi-step workflows over real MCP servers. Scores tool-use competency on realistic tasks.
Muse Spark 1.1 88.1%
- BFCL V4 In use Models call functions and tools, including multi-turn agentic tasks with web search and memory. Checked against expected calls and outcomes.
Qwen3.7-Max 75%
- τ³-bench Banking In use Agents act as banking customer-service reps over many turns with a simulated user, following policy. Pass^1 on the final database state.
Qwen 3.8 Max 55.1%
- Claw-Eval In use 300 human-verified agent tasks (service orchestration, multimodal, multi-turn dialogue) audited via traces and snapshots. Rubric scores with Pass^3 consistency. Claude Sonnet 4.6 81.4%
- DeepSearchQA In use Questions that need multi-step search and synthesis. Final answers graded against references. Kimi K3 95%