LongRCA Bench: Diagnosing Responsible Roles and Root Causes in Long-Horizon Agent Failures
Abstract
LongRCA Bench evaluates failure diagnosis across lengthy agent trajectories, and the training-free RCTA method improves attribution of responsible roles and root-cause steps.
When a long-horizon agent execution fails, outcome-level evaluation reveals the unsuccessful result but not where the decisive error entered the trajectory. Developers must then inspect the full execution to identify the responsible role and localize the earliest decisive root-cause step. Existing failure-attribution benchmarks largely focus on shorter traces, leaving diagnosis across hundreds of recorded steps underexplored. We introduce LongRCA Bench, comprising 1,140 failed trajectories across five domains without injected errors. It provides independently scored human labels for the responsible role and earliest decisive root-cause step. The median trajectory contains 145 steps, and the strongest baseline reaches only 13.2% exact root-step accuracy. We further present Root-Cause Trajectory Attribution (RCTA), a training-free method that retrieves candidate error steps from segment summaries and traces them to available earlier handoff instructions. Using the same backbone, benchmark instances, and scoring protocol, RCTA reaches 51.1% responsible-role accuracy and 24.1% exact root-step accuracy. These results highlight the need to evaluate responsible-role attribution and exact root-step localization as separate targets in long-trajectory failure diagnosis.
Community
We introduce LongRCA Bench, a benchmark for diagnosing responsible roles and root causes in long-horizon agent failures. It contains 1,140 real failed trajectories across five domains, with a median length of 145 steps and independently annotated responsible-role and earliest root-cause-step labels.
We also present RCTA, a training-free method that achieves 51.1% responsible-role accuracy and 24.1% exact root-step accuracy. The dataset and leaderboard are publicly available for further research and evaluation.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- TRAJDEBUG: Tracing Error Lifecycle to Identify Critical Failures in Long-Horizon Agent Trajectories (2026)
- SearchAuditor: Auditing and Attributing Failures in Long-Horizon Search Agents (2026)
- CUADebug: Diagnosing and Repairing Computer-Use Agent Failures (2026)
- AgentDebugX: An Open-Source Toolkit for Failure Observability, Attribution, and Recovery in LLM Agents (2026)
- Do Agent Benchmarks Measure Capability? Protocol Validity in the Age of Agentic AI (2026)
- TelemetrySuffBench: Is Agent Telemetry Sufficient for Failure-Origin Diagnosis? (2026)
- AgentTether: Graph-Guided Diagnosis and Runtime Intervention for Reliable LLM Agent Operation (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2608.15242 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 1
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper