UniClawBench
Agents act as proactive assistants on real-world tasks with live tools across many turns. Tasks are grouped by the capability they test, so failures can be traced to one skill.
Qwen runs it with the OpenClaw harness and reports it as multimodal tool use.
- Released
- July 2026
- Kind
- General assistants
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- All public
- Strongest model tested
- Claude Opus 4.8 #21 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- September 2026
- Last model added
- September 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
The rapid development of large language models and multimodal large language models has accelerated the emergence of proactive agents capable of operating everyday tools and assisting users in real-world environments. However, existing benchmarks struggle to evaluate such agents effectively, as they often rely on sandboxed environments and single-turn evaluation paradigms. Moreover, their scenario-based task taxonomies mix multiple model capabilities within the same task category, making it difficult to identify the root causes of agent failures. To address these limitations, we introduce UniClawBench, the first capability-driven benchmark designed to evaluate proactive agents in dynamic, real-world settings. UniClawBench is built around five foundational model capabilities: Skill Usage, Exploration, Long-Context Reasoning, Multimodal Understanding, and Cross-Platform Coordination. Based on these capabilities, we design 400 bilingual real-world tasks. Unlike previous benchmarks that rely on static, pre-recorded answers, our benchmark evaluates agents in live Docker containers using fine-grained, step-by-step completion checkpoints. Furthermore, we design a closed-loop evaluation strategy comprising an executor agent, a hidden supervisor agent, and a user agent to simulate realistic multi-turn human feedback without leaking grading criteria. To disentangle base model capabilities from framework-level design choices, we evaluate state-of-the-art models under multiple agent frameworks. Through comprehensive comparisons across both models and frameworks, we show how base model capabilities and agent framework designs jointly shape performance in real-world environments. To facilitate future research, we make our benchmark and code publicly available at https://github.com/HKU-MMLab/UniClawBench.
Claude Opus 4.8 leads with 47.5% among models released by May 2026
Best score per model from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best.
Qwen3.8-Omni-Flash leads with 69.6%, 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.
The newest model with a score here came out in May 2026, and nobody has tested a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- Claude Fable 5.2
-
Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- and 16 more
- 1 Claude Opus 4.8 47.5%
- 2 Claude Sonnet 4.6 45.5%
- 3 GPT-5.4 40.8%
- 4 Kimi K2.6 36.3%
- 5
Gemini 3.1 Pro 32.5%
- 6
Qwen 3.5 Plus (hosted 397B-A17B) 31.8%
- 7
Gemini 3 Flash 28.3%
- 8 GPT-5.4 Mini 21.5%
- 9
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite 15.5%
- 10 GPT-4.1 15.3%
Source: Official UniClawBench leaderboard
- 1
Qwen3.8-Omni-Flash 69.6%
- 2 Claude Opus 4.8 47.5%
- 3 Claude Sonnet 4.6 45.5%
- 4 GPT-5.4 40.8%
- 5 Kimi K2.6 36.3%
- 6
Gemini 3.1 Pro 32.5%
- 7
Qwen 3.5 Plus (hosted 397B-A17B) 31.8%
- 8
Gemini 3 Flash 28.3%
- 9 GPT-5.4 Mini 21.5%
- 10
Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite 15.5%
- 11 GPT-4.1 15.3%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official UniClawBench leaderboard
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Claude Opus 4.8 | 47.5% | OpenClaw | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 45.5% | OpenClaw | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | GPT-5.4 | 40.8% | OpenClaw | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | Kimi K2.6 | 36.3% | OpenClaw | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | | 32.5% | OpenClaw | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 31.8% | OpenClaw | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 28.3% | OpenClaw | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | GPT-5.4 Mini | 21.5% | OpenClaw | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | | 15.5% | OpenClaw | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | GPT-4.1 | 15.3% | OpenClaw | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | | 69.6% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | Claude Opus 4.8 | 47.5% | OpenClaw | May 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | 45.5% | OpenClaw | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | GPT-5.4 | 40.8% | OpenClaw | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | Kimi K2.6 | 36.3% | OpenClaw | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | | 32.5% | OpenClaw | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | | 31.8% | OpenClaw | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | | 28.3% | OpenClaw | Dec 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | GPT-5.4 Mini | 21.5% | OpenClaw | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | | 15.5% | OpenClaw | Mar 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | GPT-4.1 | 15.3% | OpenClaw | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
Number one over time 2 models have held number one with claims included since its release in July 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Source: Official UniClawBench leaderboard
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official UniClawBench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
One lab 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.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 18, 2026 | 69.6 | UniClawBench Multimodal tool use (OpenClaw) |
One system card reports it
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 22, 2026 | | 69.6 | UniClawBench, OpenClaw (Table 6) | Capabilities |
More 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%