Towards a Science of AI Agent Reliability
AI agents are increasingly deployed to execute important tasks. While rising accuracy scores on standard benchmarks suggest rapid progress, many agents still continue to fail in practice. This discrepancy highlights a fundamental limitation of current evaluations: compressing agent behavior into a single success metric obscures critical operational flaws. Notably, it ignores whether agents behave consistently across runs, withstand perturbations, fail predictably, or have bounded error severity. Grounded in safety-critical engineering, we provide a holistic performance profile by proposing twelve concrete metrics that decompose agent reliability along four key dimensions: consistency, robustness, predictability, and safety. Evaluating 14 agentic models across two complementary benchmarks, we find that recent capability gains have only yielded small improvements in reliability. By exposing these persistent limitations, our metrics complement traditional evaluations while offering tools for reasoning about how agents perform, degrade, and fail.
69967a061268a6b79e0d02b3
Stephan Rabanser
69967a061268a6b79e0d02b4
Sayash Kapoor
69967a061268a6b79e0d02b5
Peter Kirgis
69967a061268a6b79e0d02b6
Kangheng Liu
69967a061268a6b79e0d02b7
Saiteja Utpala
69967a061268a6b79e0d02b8
Arvind Narayanan
Towards a Science of AI Agent Reliability
AI agents are increasingly deployed to execute important tasks. While rising accuracy scores on standard benchmarks suggest rapid progress, many agents still continue to fail in practice. This discrepancy highlights a fundamental limitation of current evaluations: compressing agent behavior into a single success metric obscures critical operational flaws. Notably, it ignores whether agents behave consistently across runs, withstand perturbations, fail predictably, or have bounded error severity. Grounded in safety-critical engineering, we provide a holistic performance profile by proposing twelve concrete metrics that decompose agent reliability along four key dimensions: consistency, robustness, predictability, and safety. Evaluating 14 agentic models across two complementary benchmarks, we find that recent capability gains have only yielded small improvements in reliability. By exposing these persistent limitations, our metrics complement traditional evaluations while offering tools for reasoning about how agents perform, degrade, and fail.
Traditional benchmark evaluations of AI agents fail to capture critical reliability issues, prompting the development of comprehensive metrics that assess consistency, robustness, predictability, and safety across multiple dimensions.
AI agents reliability consistency robustness predictability safety performance profiling benchmark evaluation