MCPMark
Agent stress-tests realistic MCP tool use (GitHub, Notion, Postgres, browser). Graded by programmatic verification scripts.
Kimi K3 reports a 'Verified' revision.
In the authors’ words
MCP standardizes how LLMs interact with external systems, forming the foundation for general agents. However, existing MCP benchmarks remain narrow in scope: they focus on read-heavy tasks or tasks with limited interaction depth, and fail to capture the complexity and realism of real-world workflows. To address this gap, we propose MCPMark, a benchmark designed to evaluate MCP use in a more realistic and comprehensive manner. It consists of 127 high-quality tasks collaboratively created by domain experts and AI agents. Each task begins with a curated initial state and includes a programmatic script for automatic verification. These tasks demand richer and more diverse interactions with the environment, involving a broad range of create, read, update, and delete (CRUD) operations. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of cutting-edge LLMs using a minimal agent framework that operates in a tool-calling loop. Empirical results show that the best-performing model, gpt-5-medium, reaches only 52.56% pass@1 and 33.86% pass^4, while other widely regarded strong models, including claude-sonnet-4 and o3, fall below 30% pass@1 and 15% pass^4. On average, LLMs require 16.2 execution turns and 17.4 tool calls per task, significantly surpassing those in previous MCP benchmarks and highlighting the stress-testing nature of MCPMark.
- Level
- University Undergraduates and entry-level professionals
- 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.
Kimi K3 leads with 94.5% among models released by Jul 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 Jul 2026, and nobody has reported 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 15 more
- 1 Kimi K3 94.5%
- 2 Kimi K2.7 Code 81.1%
- 3
Qwen3.7-Max 60.8%
- 4
Qwen3.7-Plus 58.7%
- 5 Kimi K2.6 55.9%
- 6
Seed2.0 Pro 54.7%
- 7
Qwen 3.6 Plus 48.2%
- 8
Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 46.1%
- 9
DeepSeek-V3.2 38%
- 10
Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B 37%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kimi K3 | 94.5% | Jul 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | Kimi K2.7 Code | 81.1% | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 3 | | 60.8% | May 2026 | Model card | |
| 4 | | 58.7% | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 5 | Kimi K2.6 | 55.9% | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 6 | | 54.7% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 7 | | 48.2% | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 8 | | 46.1% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 9 | | 38% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 10 | | 37% | Apr 2026 | Model card |
The benchmark's own leaderboard has 28 models. We plot every source in the charts below.
The best score, 57.5%, costs $1.97 a task
Runs on the cost frontier score higher than any run that's cheaper. The costs are the leaderboard's own estimates, so compare them only within this benchmark.
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.2 | high | 57.5% | $1.97 | 27,785 | |
| | high | 53.9% | $2.09 | 8,911 | |
| GPT-5 | medium | 52.6% | $1.00 | 21,907 | |
| GPT-5 | high | 51.6% | $1.21 | 36,741 | |
| | low | 50.8% | $2.02 | 8,840 | |
| GPT-5 | low | 46.9% | $0.99 | 18,912 | |
| Claude Opus 4.5 | high | 42.3% | $3.67 | 10,533 | |
| | thinking | 36.8% | $0.25 | 8,782 | |
| Claude Sonnet 4.5 | 32.1% | $2.22 | 6,218 | ||
| Grok 4 | 31.7% | $2.03 | 8,420 | ||
| GPT-5 mini | high | 30.3% | $0.32 | 28,774 | |
| Claude Opus 4.1 | 29.9% | $9.18 | 5,143 | ||
| | non-thinking | 29.7% | $0.21 | 5,441 | |
| Claude Sonnet 4 | high | 28.4% | $3.48 | 5,036 | |
| Claude Sonnet 4 | 28.1% | $1.99 | 4,625 | ||
| Claude Sonnet 4 | low | 27.4% | $3.63 | 4,943 | |
| GPT-5 mini | medium | 27.4% | $0.20 | 10,307 | |
| o3 | 25.4% | $0.90 | 8,593 | ||
| | 24.8% | $0.29 | 3,512 | ||
| Grok 4 Fast | 24% | $0.14 | 8,892 | ||
| Kimi K2 Sep 2025 | 21.9% | $0.57 | 5,011 | ||
| | thinking | 21.3% | $0.08 | 14,640 | |
| grok-code-fast-1 | 20.5% | $0.13 | 5,650 | ||
| Kimi K2 Jul 2025 | 19.1% | $0.29 | 2,957 | ||
| | 17.7% | $1.26 | 2,986 | ||
| o4-mini | 17.3% | $0.50 | 15,571 | ||
| | non-thinking | 16.7% | $0.28 | 2,806 | |
| | 16.5% | $0.10 | 2,494 | ||
| | 15.8% | $1.28 | 7,016 | ||
| GLM-4.5 | 15.6% | $0.14 | 4,092 | ||
| | 9.06% | $0.33 | 8,799 | ||
| GPT-5 mini | low | 8.27% | $0.06 | 3,168 | |
| GPT-4.1 | 8.07% | $0.66 | 1,549 | ||
| GPT-5 nano | medium | 6.30% | $0.03 | 23,828 | |
| GPT-5 nano | high | 5.12% | $0.06 | 52,072 | |
| gpt-oss-120b | 4.72% | $0.005 | 1,373 | ||
| GPT-5 nano | low | 4.33% | $0.02 | 12,789 | |
| GPT-4.1 mini | 3.94% | $0.47 | 1,898 | ||
| GPT-4.1 nano | 0% | $0.02 | 1,636 |
3 models have held number one since its release in Sep 2025
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.
The best score passed 85% in Jul 2026
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
2 labs 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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16 Jul 2026 | Kimi K3 | 94.5 | MCPMark-Verified |
| 12 Jun 2026 | Kimi K2.7 Code | 81.1 | MCP Mark Verified |
| 1 Jun 2026 | 58.7 | MCP-Mark | |
| 20 May 2026 | 60.8 | MCP-Mark | |
| 20 Apr 2026 | Kimi K2.6 | 55.9 | MCPMark |
| 15 Apr 2026 | 37 | MCPMark | |
| 2 Apr 2026 | 48.2 | MCPMark | |
| 16 Feb 2026 | 46.1 | MCP-Mark | |
| 14 Feb 2026 | 54.7 | MCP-Mark | |
| 1 Dec 2025 | 38 | MCP-Mark (Pass@1) |
3 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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 27 Jul 2026 | Kimi K3 technical report | 94.5 | MCPMark-Verified (Table 2) | Capabilities |
| 14 Feb 2026 | | 54.7 | MCP-Mark (Table 11) | Capabilities |
| 1 Dec 2025 | | 38 | MCP-Mark (Pass@1), internal environment, DeepSeek-V3.2 Thinking (Table 2) | Capabilities |
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%