Agentic systems must repeatedly decide whether to answer directly, decompose a task, invoke a tool, execute code, delegate to a specialist, verify an intermediate result, or recover from failure. These meta-decisions affect not only task success but also operating cost and latency, yet they are often embedded inside an orchestration framework and evaluated only through aggregate task accuracy. We present MetaRoute-Bench, an open, inspectable framework for comparing meta-decision policies under a shared execution model. The initial benchmark contains 180 synthetic task profiles spanning data analysis, research, and document processing, eight routing policies, and 30 paired random seeds. Across 43,200 traces, a task-aware compositional policy achieves 79.4% success compared with 76.7% for a strong workload-specific static policy, 67.4% for one-shot task routing, and 52.9% for direct answering. Relative to the static policy, this is a 2.7 percentage-point improvement with paired 95% CI of plus or minus 2.0 points, at 4.7% higher mean cost and 6.4% higher latency. Ablations show the largest losses when route composition is restricted to one operation and when verification is removed. These results are generated by a seeded offline execution model rather than a live deployment; accordingly, the primary contribution is a reproducible evaluation method and an analysis of routing-policy tradeoffs, not evidence of production effectiveness. We release task generation, policies, traces, tests, and analysis artifacts to support live-system validation.
Natan Vidra, Alina Kapanova, Arun Kanhai et al.· 0 citations
AI coding agent benchmarks rank agents with the Chen et al. (2021) pass@k estimator, but current implementations misapply it: they set n to the number of unit tests in a single submission rather than the number of independent rollout attempts, conflating test-suite size with attempt independence. We diagnose this operationalization error, prove it by counterexample, and propose reliability@k, the same estimator applied correctly, with n = independent rollouts and c = fully-passing rollouts per (task, agent) pair. In a synthetic multi-rollout benchmark, the misapplied metric inflates reported scores by 0.85-0.97 in absolute terms (0.96-0.98 reported vs. 0.00-0.12 corrected), and a cheap single-rollout proxy fails to substitute for repeated runs (Spearman $\rho = 0.417$). Motivated by evidence that functional correctness does not imply security safety, we additionally propose security-adjusted reliability@k, which counts only rollouts that are both functionally correct and free of high-severity insecure patterns. In an initial live-API test with three agents, the adjustment did not change any ranking under our current scanner and threshold, so we present it as a proposed complementary lens whose decisive evaluation requires better-powered future runs. Finally, a preliminary 5-task SWE-bench Verified pilot observes the same core concern in a real repository setting: macro-averaged hidden-test pass rate was 0.80 while strict task resolution was 0.20.
Jiajun Jiang, Sharon Zheng, Natan Vidra et al.· 0 citations