Stop Comparing LLM Agents Without Disclosing the Harness
arXiv AIArchived May 26, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2605.23950v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This position paper argues that, for long-horizon tasks evaluated across models with comparable frontier capability, the agent execution harness, namely the infrastructure layer that governs context construction, tool interaction, orchestration, and verification around a language model, is often a stronger determinant of agent performance than the model it wraps. We formalize and defend the Binding Constraint Thesis: in this regime, performance var
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 7 May 2026]
Stop Comparing LLM Agents Without Disclosing the Harness
Yunbei Zhang, Janet Wang, Yingqiang Ge, Weijie Xu, Jihun Hamm, Chandan K. Reddy
This position paper argues that, for long-horizon tasks evaluated across models with comparable frontier capability, the agent execution harness, namely the infrastructure layer that governs context construction, tool interaction, orchestration, and verification around a language model, is often a stronger determinant of agent performance than the model it wraps. We formalize and defend the Binding Constraint Thesis: in this regime, performance variance is governed more by harness configuration than by model choice, and current evaluation protocols therefore systematically misattribute harness-level gains to model improvements. We support this thesis along three lines. First, a control-theoretic formalization treats the harness as the controller of a closed-loop dynamical system and the LLM as the stochastic policy it governs, which explains why small harness changes can produce performance shifts that exceed those obtained by substituting one model for another. Second, published benchmarks, industry deployments, and a controlled variance decomposition show that harness-induced variance can substantially exceed model-induced variance, including cases of model ranking reversal. Third, we propose a harness-aware evaluation framework with a disclosure standard and a variance decomposition protocol. Until harness specifications are disclosed, leaderboard comparisons for long-horizon agents should be treated as incomplete and potentially misleading.
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Software Engineering (cs.SE)
Cite as: arXiv:2605.23950 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2605.23950v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.23950
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Yunbei Zhang [view email]
[v1] Thu, 7 May 2026 15:24:59 UTC (188 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-05
Change to browse by:
cs
cs.SE
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)