Benchmark Almanac

Claw-Eval Pass^3

LongCat-2.5 78.3% leads since November 2026
Claude Opus 4.6 70.4% leads since April 2026
LongCat-2.5 78.3% leads since November 2026
In use

Agents complete 300 human-verified tasks in service orchestration, multimodal interaction, and professional dialogue. Pass^3 credits a task only if all three trials pass.

Pass^3 is the strict metric of Claw-Eval. Average score and Pass@k are also reported.

Made by
Claw-Eval team
Released
April 2026
Kind
General assistants
Level
University
Scored
Graded by a model
Answers
Agent task
Tasks
All public
Strongest model tested
GPT-5.4 #27 on the capability index
Last in a launch post
November 2026
Last model added
November 2026
Scores refreshed
November 12th, 2026

In the authors’ words

Large language models are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents for multi-step workflows in real-world software environments. However, existing agent benchmarks are limited by trajectory-opaque grading, underspecified safety and robustness evaluation, and narrow coverage of modalities and interaction paradigms. We introduce Claw-Eval, an end-to-end evaluation suite addressing these gaps with 300 human-verified tasks spanning 9 categories across three groups: general service orchestration, multimodal perception and interaction, and multi-turn professional dialogue. To enable trajectory-aware grading, each run is recorded through three independent evidence channels: execution traces, audit logs, and environment snapshots, yielding 2,159 fine-grained rubric items. The scoring protocol evaluates Completion, Safety, and Robustness, with Average Score, Pass@k, and Pass^k across three trials to distinguish genuine capability from lucky outcomes. Experiments on 14 frontier models show that: (1) Trajectory-opaque evaluation is systematically unreliable, missing 44% of safety violations and 13% of robustness failures detected by our framework. (2) Capability does not imply consistency, with Pass@3 remaining stable under error injection while Pass^3 dropping by up to 24 percentage points. (3) Agent capability is strongly multi-dimensional, with model rankings varying across task groups and metrics, indicating that our heterogeneous evaluation coverage is essential. Claw-Eval highlights directions for developing agents that are not only capable but reliably deployable.

Abstract of Claw-Eval: Towards Trustworthy Evaluation of Autonomous Agents (arXiv:2604.06132, CC0)
13
Models scored in lab cards
12
Launch posts list it, from 8 labs
2
System cards report it, from 1 lab

LongCat-2.5 leads with 78.3%

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

Claude Opus 4.6 leads with 70.4% across all independent runs

Best score per model across the official leaderboard, Epoch AI’s own runs and any board Epoch AI copied. Each bar and row names its source.

LongCat-2.5 leads with 78.3%, claims included

Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.

  1. 1 LongCat-2.5 78.3%
  2. 2 Tencent Hy3 68.5%
  3. 3 Step 3.7 Flash 67.1%
  4. 4 Ring-2.6-1T 63.8%
  5. 5 MiMo-V2.5-Pro 63.8%
  6. 6 Kimi K2.6 62.3%
  7. 7 MiMo-V2.5 62.3%
  8. 8 Qwen3.6 27B 60.6%
  9. 9 Qwen 3.6 Plus 58.7%
  10. 10 Tencent Hy3 preview 55%
  11. 11 LFM3-1.7B 51.4%
  12. 12 Ling-2.6-1T 51%
  13. 13 Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B 50%

Source: Labs’ model cards

#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 LongCat-2.5 78.3% Nov 2026 Lab model card
2 Tencent Hy3 68.5% Jul 2026 Lab model card
3 Step 3.7 Flash 67.1% May 2026 Lab model card
4 Ring-2.6-1T 63.8% Jun 2026 Lab model card
5 MiMo-V2.5-Pro 63.8% Apr 2026 Lab model card
6 Kimi K2.6 62.3% Apr 2026 Lab model card
7 MiMo-V2.5 62.3% Apr 2026 Lab model card
8 Qwen3.6 27B 60.6% Apr 2026 Lab model card
9 Qwen 3.6 Plus 58.7% Apr 2026 Lab model card
10 Tencent Hy3 preview 55% Apr 2026 Lab model card
11 LFM3-1.7B 51.4% Oct 2026 Lab model card
12 Ling-2.6-1T 51% Apr 2026 Lab model card
13 Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B 50% Apr 2026 Lab model card
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 Claude Opus 4.6 70.4% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
2 Step 3.7 Flash 68.3% May 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Claude Sonnet 4.6 67.8% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
4 Muse Spark 63.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
5 MiMo-V2.5-Pro 63.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
6 GLM-5.1 62.3% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
7 Kimi K2.6 62.3% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
8 MiMo-V2.5 62.3% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
9 GPT-5.4 60.3% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
10 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 59.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
11 Qwen 3.6 Plus 58.8% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
12 SenseNova 6.7 Flash-Lite 58.8% May 2026 Official leaderboard
13 Gemini 3.1 Pro 57.8% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
14 MiMo-V2-Pro 57.8% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
15 DeepSeek-V4-Flash 57.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
16 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 56.8% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
17 GLM-5-Turbo 55.8% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
18 GLM-5V-Turbo 53.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
19 Kimi K2.5 52.3% Jan 2026 Official leaderboard
20 Gemini 3 Flash 49.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
21 MiniMax-M2.7 48.7% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
22 MiMo-V2-Omni 45.2% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
23 DeepSeek-V3.2 40.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
24 Nemotron 3 Super 5.50% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 LongCat-2.5 78.3% Nov 2026 Lab model card
2 Claude Opus 4.6 70.4% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
3 Tencent Hy3 68.5% Jul 2026 Lab model card
4 Step 3.7 Flash 68.3% May 2026 Official leaderboard
5 Claude Sonnet 4.6 67.8% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
6 Ring-2.6-1T 63.8% Jun 2026 Lab model card
7 Muse Spark 63.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
8 MiMo-V2.5-Pro 63.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
9 GLM-5.1 62.3% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
10 Kimi K2.6 62.3% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
11 MiMo-V2.5 62.3% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
12 Qwen3.6 27B 60.6% Apr 2026 Lab model card
13 GPT-5.4 60.3% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
14 DeepSeek-V4-Pro 59.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
15 Qwen 3.6 Plus 58.8% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
16 SenseNova 6.7 Flash-Lite 58.8% May 2026 Official leaderboard
17 Gemini 3.1 Pro 57.8% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
18 MiMo-V2-Pro 57.8% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
19 DeepSeek-V4-Flash 57.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
20 Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 56.8% Feb 2026 Official leaderboard
21 GLM-5-Turbo 55.8% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
22 Tencent Hy3 preview 55% Apr 2026 Lab model card
23 GLM-5V-Turbo 53.8% Apr 2026 Official leaderboard
24 Kimi K2.5 52.3% Jan 2026 Official leaderboard
25 LFM3-1.7B 51.4% Oct 2026 Lab model card
26 Ling-2.6-1T 51% Apr 2026 Lab model card
27 Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B 50% Apr 2026 Lab model card
28 Gemini 3 Flash 49.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
29 MiniMax-M2.7 48.7% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
30 MiMo-V2-Omni 45.2% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard
31 DeepSeek-V3.2 40.2% Dec 2025 Official leaderboard
32 Nemotron 3 Super 5.50% Mar 2026 Official leaderboard

The benchmark's own leaderboard has 26 entries, 24 of them models we track. Switch the scores above to rank them together.

6 models have held number one in labs’ own numbers since its release in April 2026 Number one over time 2 models have held number one with claims included since its release in April 2026

Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.

Anthropic Qwen Moonshot AI Xiaomi Corp StepFun Tencent Meituan
Own leaderboard Not tested since May 2026
Lab claims 6 leaders
LongCat-2.5 78.3%

Sources: Official Claw-Eval Pass^3 leaderboard and labs’ model cards

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 Reported by the lab in its model card Best so far
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) LongCat-2.5 Claude Opus 4.6 Kimi K2.5 DeepSeek-V3.2 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2026 2027 Near the ceiling (85%) LongCat-2.5 Claude Opus 4.6

Sources: Official Claw-Eval Pass^3 leaderboard and labs’ model cards

3 labs put it in a launch post in the last six months

Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.

Qwen
Moonshot AI
Xiaomi Corp
Tencent
Ant Group
StepFun
Liquid AI
Meituan
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
Nov 2, 2026 LongCat-2.5 78.3 Claw-Eval (Pass^3)
Oct 27, 2026 LFM3-1.7B 51.4 Claw-Eval General (EN), pass^3
Jul 2, 2026 Tencent Hy3 68.5 ClawEval (pass^3)
May 29, 2026 Step 3.7 Flash 67.1 Claweval-v1.1 (pass^3)
Apr 29, 2026 Ling-2.6-1T 51 Claw-Eval (pass^3)
Apr 27, 2026 MiMo-V2.5-Pro 63.8 Claw-Eval (pass^3)
Apr 23, 2026 Tencent Hy3 preview 55 ClawEval (pass^3)
Apr 22, 2026 Qwen3.6 27B 60.6 Claw-Eval Pass^3
Apr 22, 2026 MiMo-V2.5 62.3 Claw-Eval Text
Apr 20, 2026 Kimi K2.6 62.3 Claw Eval (pass^3)
Apr 15, 2026 Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B 50 Claw-Eval Pass^3
Apr 2, 2026 Qwen 3.6 Plus 58.7 Claw-Eval Pass^3

2 system cards report it, from 1 lab

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
Jun 13, 2026 Ring-2.6-1T technical report 63.8 ClawEval (0424, Pass^3), high, no xhigh value (Table 6) Capabilities
Jun 13, 2026 Ling-2.6-1T technical report 51 ClawEval, Pass@3 (Table 5) Capabilities

5 lab claims next to the leaderboard

Each score a lab reported for its own model, beside the same model's best score on the leaderboard. Gaps mostly come from different harnesses, effort levels and task subsets. 4 of them match, which usually means one side copied the other. Every benchmark.

Model Lab says Board says Gap
Step 3.7 Flash 67.1% Claweval-v1.1 (pass^3) 68.3% Leaderboard −1.2 pts
Qwen 3.6 Plus 58.7% Claw-Eval Pass^3 58.8% Leaderboard Same
Kimi K2.6 62.3% Claw Eval (pass^3) 62.3% Leaderboard Same
MiMo-V2.5 62.3% Claw-Eval Text 62.3% Leaderboard Same
MiMo-V2.5-Pro 63.8% Claw-Eval (pass^3) 63.8% Leaderboard Same

More in Tool use

All 144 in Tool use
  • AutomationBench In use Agent completes end-to-end business workflows inside a simulated company exposing dozens of REST APIs. Graded on resulting state. Gemini 4 Carbon 53.9%
  • MCP Atlas In use Multi-step workflows over real MCP servers. Scores tool-use competency on realistic tasks. Gemini 4 Argon 90.7%
  • BFCL V4 In use Models call functions and tools, including multi-turn agentic tasks with web search and memory. Checked against expected calls and outcomes. Qwen3.7-Max 75%
  • τ³-bench Banking In use Agents act as banking customer-service reps over many turns with a simulated user, following policy. Pass^1 on the final database state. Qwen 3.8 Max 55.1%
  • Toolathlon-Verified In use 108 long-horizon tasks across 32 apps through about 600 MCP tools. Execution-based checkers inspect final environment state. GLM-5.3-Flash 78.4%
  • DeepSearchQA In use Questions that need multi-step search and synthesis. Final answers graded against references. Kimi K3 95%