Benchmark Almanac

Workspace-Bench-Lite

Claude Opus 4.7 66.7% leads since May 2026
Not in model cards

Agents complete 100 workspace tasks. The leaderboard reports the percentage of 1,856 rubric checks passed, with separate runs for each model and harness.

This Lite subset has a separate 45-run leaderboard. The full benchmark does not publish named per-system scores. Remove the Lite alias from workspacebench during integration.

Released
May 2026
Kind
Documents and spreadsheets
Level
University
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Open-ended
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
GPT-5.4 #27 on the capability index
Last model added
April 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Workspace learning requires AI agents to identify, reason over, exploit, and update explicit and implicit dependencies among heterogeneous files in a worker's workspace, enabling them to complete both routine and advanced tasks effectively. Despite its importance, existing relevant benchmarks largely evaluate agents on pre-specified or synthesized files with limited real-world dependencies, leaving workspace-level evaluation underexplored. To this end, we introduce Workspace-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating AI agents on Workspace Learning involving Large-Scale File Dependencies. We construct realistic workspaces with 5 worker profiles, 74 file types, 20,476 files (up to 20GB) and curate 388 tasks, each with its own file dependency graph, evaluated across 7,399 total rubrics that require cross-file retrieval, contextual reasoning, and adaptive decision-making. We further provide Workspace-Bench-Lite, a 100-task subset that preserves the benchmark distribution while reducing evaluation costs by about 70%. We evaluate 4 popular agent harnesses and 7 foundation models. Experimental results show that current agents remain far from reliable workspace learning, where the best reaches only about 60%, substantially below the human result of 80.7%, and the average performance across agents is only 43.3%.

Abstract of Workspace-Bench 1.0: Benchmarking AI Agents on Workspace Tasks with Large-Scale File Dependencies (arXiv:2605.03596, CC0)
10
Entries on its own leaderboard, 9 models we track

Claude Opus 4.7 leads with 66.7% among models released by April 2026

Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 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 April 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:

  1. 1 Claude Opus 4.7 Test-Rubrics-Checked 66.7%
  2. 2 GLM-5.1 Test-Rubrics-Checked 61%
  3. 3 Qwen 3.6 Plus Test-Rubrics-Checked 55.6%
  4. 4 MiniMax-M2.7 Test-Rubrics-Checked 54.6%
  5. 5 Seed2.0 Lite (0215) Test-Rubrics-Checked 53%
  6. 6 GPT-5.4 Test-Rubrics-Checked 51.8%
  7. 7 Kimi K2.5 Test-Rubrics-Checked 49.1%
  8. 8 Seed-2.0-Code Test-Rubrics-Checked 42.3%
  9. 9 Gemini 3.1 Pro Test-Rubrics-Checked 37.5%
  10. 10 Grok 4.3 Test-Rubrics-Checked 36.9%

Source: Official Workspace-Bench-Lite leaderboard

#EntryScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 4.7 66.7% Test-Rubrics-Checked, OpenClaw Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
2 GLM-5.1 61% Test-Rubrics-Checked, DeepAgent Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Qwen 3.6 Plus 55.6% Test-Rubrics-Checked, OpenClaw Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
4 MiniMax-M2.7 54.6% Test-Rubrics-Checked, ClaudeCode Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Seed2.0 Lite (0215) 53% Test-Rubrics-Checked, ClaudeCode Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
6 GPT-5.4 51.8% Test-Rubrics-Checked, ClaudeCode Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Kimi K2.5 49.1% Test-Rubrics-Checked, Hermes Jan 2026 Official leaderboard
8 Seed-2.0-Code 42.3% Test-Rubrics-Checked, ClaudeCode May 2026 Official leaderboard
9 Gemini 3.1 Pro 37.5% Test-Rubrics-Checked, ClaudeCode Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
10 Grok 4.3 36.9% Test-Rubrics-Checked, Codex Apr 2026 Official leaderboard

Number one over time

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

Anthropic
Own leaderboard Not tested since May 2026

Source: Official Workspace-Bench-Lite leaderboard

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 Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 4.7 GLM-5.1 Qwen 3.6 Plus Seed2.0 Lite (0215) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 Near the ceiling (85%) Claude Opus 4.7 Qwen 3.6 Plus

Source: Official Workspace-Bench-Lite 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 Economic work

All 97 in Economic work
  • JobBench In use 130 tasks from 35 occupations workers most want delegated. Agent works through messy reference files, graded by fact-anchored binary rubrics. GLM-5.3 61.4%
  • GDPval In use Real work tasks from 44 occupations with reference files. Experts blindly compare model deliverables with expert work. Metric is win-or-tie rate. Seed2.1 Pro 87.9%
  • GDPval-AA v2.1 In use Agents with shell and web access complete 220 GDPval gold tasks from 44 occupations. Blind pairwise comparisons give Elo ratings. Claude Opus 5.5 1,846
  • AA-Briefcase v1.1 In use Version 1.1 of Artificial Analysis's multi-hour office work evaluation, with Elo ratings fitted by Crowd-BT. Claude Opus 5.5 1,822
  • CoWorkBench In use Agent completes long-horizon productivity tasks across computer science, finance, law and medicine. Qwen in-house scoring (method unpublished). Claude Fable 5 75.9%
  • OfficeQA In use Grounded reasoning over a large corpus of U.S. Treasury Bulletin documents: locate tables and compute precise numeric answers. Claude Opus 4.7 86.3%