Xiu, Zidi, Sun, David Q., Cheng, Kevin, Patel, Maitrik, Date, Josh, Zhang, Yizhe, Lu, Jiarui, Attia, Omar, Vemulapalli, Raviteja, Tuzel, Oncel, Cao, Meng, Bengio, Samy · Mar 2, 2026
arXiv paper presents ASTRA-bench for testing tool-use agents with personal context
Markdown · JSON · Original source
The authors present ASTRA-bench, a for testing whether can use changing personal context, tools and multi-step reasoning together. Its event-driven pipeline creates 2,413 scenarios across four protagonists, based on longitudinal life events, and labels them for referential, functional and informational complexity. The authors report that state-of-the-art models, including -4.5-Opus and DeepSeek-V3.2, perform significantly worse under high-complexity conditions; they identify argument generation as the main bottleneck. Their point is that success on context-free, single-turn benchmarks may not capture how well agents can reason with messy personal information and coordinate plans. They release the benchmark, execution environment and evaluation scripts as a diagnostic testbed for developing context-aware assistants. The abstract does not establish how performance on this benchmark translates to assistants used in people’s lives.
Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims.
Original source
cs.AI · Article
Source details
Original source date: Mar 2, 2026 (2026-03-02).
Date basis: Date basis not provided.
Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-08T20:01:32.140Z. First observed: 2026-11-06T05:11:00.015Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-08T19:55:35.682Z.
Referenced by
Recorded citations and public file attachments. A reference alone does not establish agreement or influence.
No public references recorded here yet.
Limits
The available evidence is the page and abstract, not the paper’s full evaluation details; it does not provide scores or breakdowns supporting closer comparison of models or scenarios. The abstract reports performance but does not establish how those results translate to AI assistants used in people’s lives.
Open question
How do the reported performance drops and argument-generation bottleneck vary across ASTRA-bench’s scenarios and evaluated models?
Source-stated
The authors introduce ASTRA-bench to evaluate tool-use agent reasoning and planning with changing personal context and complex user intents.
a benchmark that uniquely unifies time-evolving personal context with an interactive toolbox and complex user intents
Source-stated
The benchmark contains 2,413 scenarios across four protagonists, generated from longitudinal life events and annotated for three kinds of complexity.
generates 2,413 scenarios across four protagonists, grounded in longitudinal life events and annotated by referential, functional, and informational complexity
Source-stated
The authors report that evaluated models perform significantly worse under high-complexity conditions and identify argument generation as the primary bottleneck.
reveals significant performance degradation under high-complexity conditions, with argument generation emerging as the primary bottleneck
Source-stated
The authors release ASTRA-bench with an execution environment and evaluation scripts as a diagnostic testbed.
We release ASTRA-bench with a full execution environment and evaluation scripts to provide a diagnostic testbed
Source and contributor context
Xiu, Zidi, Sun, David Q., Cheng, Kevin, Patel, Maitrik, Date, Josh, Zhang, Yizhe, Lu, Jiarui, Attia, Omar, Vemulapalli, Raviteja, Tuzel, Oncel, Cao, Meng, Bengio, Samy · Article author
These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage.
Source media
No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction.
Terms and references
Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.
Tool use
A model's ability to operate other software, such as a search engine, a calculator or a code runner, while it works.
Benchmark
A defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
AI agent
An AI system that chooses and carries out actions toward a goal, often using software tools.
arXiv
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Claude
Claude is Anthropic’s family of AI models and assistants for tasks such as writing, analysis and coding.
Editorial provenance
Version 1. Publication ID: ba979938-20f1-4c17-856a-3a2a24d45606.
Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna.
Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-08T20:01:32.140Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true.
Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material_development.
Observation: cd5d70bed253b62881c6ea2b354a40a7aa6fff50378e1f28e220e388ff72bda4. Source text hash: 36fff8b762972be2ea5ccc55eee255de55e4275a85725e07adcc76d4f8ac0820.
Revision and source-check history
Version 1 · 2026-11-08T20:01:32.140Z
arXiv paper presents ASTRA-bench for testing tool-use agents with personal context
The authors present ASTRA-bench, a for testing whether can use changing personal context, tools and multi-step reasoning together. Its event-driven pipeline creates 2,413 scenarios across four protagonists, based on longitudinal life events, and labels them for referential, functional and informational complexity. The authors report that state-of-the-art models, including -4.5-Opus and DeepSeek-V3.2, perform significantly worse under high-complexity conditions; they identify argument generation as the main bottleneck. Their point is that success on context-free, single-turn benchmarks may not capture how well agents can reason with messy personal information and coordinate plans. They release the benchmark, execution environment and evaluation scripts as a diagnostic testbed for developing context-aware assistants. The abstract does not establish how performance on this benchmark translates to assistants used in people’s lives.
Original source
cs.AI · Article
Source details
Original source date: Mar 2, 2026 (2026-03-02).
Date basis: Date basis not provided.
Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-08T20:01:32.140Z. First observed: 2026-11-06T05:11:00.015Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-08T19:55:35.682Z.
Limits
The available evidence is the page and abstract, not the paper’s full evaluation details; it does not provide scores or breakdowns supporting closer comparison of models or scenarios. The abstract reports performance but does not establish how those results translate to AI assistants used in people’s lives.
Open question
How do the reported performance drops and argument-generation bottleneck vary across ASTRA-bench’s scenarios and evaluated models?
Source-stated
The authors introduce ASTRA-bench to evaluate tool-use agent reasoning and planning with changing personal context and complex user intents.
a benchmark that uniquely unifies time-evolving personal context with an interactive toolbox and complex user intents
Source-stated
The benchmark contains 2,413 scenarios across four protagonists, generated from longitudinal life events and annotated for three kinds of complexity.
generates 2,413 scenarios across four protagonists, grounded in longitudinal life events and annotated by referential, functional, and informational complexity
Source-stated
The authors report that evaluated models perform significantly worse under high-complexity conditions and identify argument generation as the primary bottleneck.
reveals significant performance degradation under high-complexity conditions, with argument generation emerging as the primary bottleneck
Source-stated
The authors release ASTRA-bench with an execution environment and evaluation scripts as a diagnostic testbed.
We release ASTRA-bench with a full execution environment and evaluation scripts to provide a diagnostic testbed
Source and contributor context
Xiu, Zidi, Sun, David Q., Cheng, Kevin, Patel, Maitrik, Date, Josh, Zhang, Yizhe, Lu, Jiarui, Attia, Omar, Vemulapalli, Raviteja, Tuzel, Oncel, Cao, Meng, Bengio, Samy · Article author
These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage.
Source media
No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction.
Terms and references
Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.
Tool use
A model's ability to operate other software, such as a search engine, a calculator or a code runner, while it works.
Benchmark
A defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
AI agent
An AI system that chooses and carries out actions toward a goal, often using software tools.
arXiv
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Claude
Claude is Anthropic’s family of AI models and assistants for tasks such as writing, analysis and coding.
Editorial provenance
Version 1. Publication ID: ba979938-20f1-4c17-856a-3a2a24d45606.
Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna.
Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-08T20:01:32.140Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true.
Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material_development.
Observation: cd5d70bed253b62881c6ea2b354a40a7aa6fff50378e1f28e220e388ff72bda4. Source text hash: 36fff8b762972be2ea5ccc55eee255de55e4275a85725e07adcc76d4f8ac0820.
uncertain · 2026-11-08T20:01:32.140Z · anthropic/claude-opus-5.5
Publication: ba979938-20f1-4c17-856a-3a2a24d45606
attribution — pass: The reading consistently attributes ASTRA-bench, its design, the model results and the release to the paper's authors on arXiv. Findings are framed as what the authors report, not as established fact.
We present ASTRA-bench (Assistant Skills in Tool-use, Reasoning \& Action-planning)
summary — uncertain: The summary is mostly accurate but weakens the authors' conclusion. The sentence 'Their point is that success on context-free, single-turn benchmarks may not capture...' turns a firm claim into a hedge. The authors say their findings 'expose critical limitations' in agents' grounding and multi-step planning. Smallest repair: state that the authors say the results expose critical limitations in current agents. Separately, the central term 'argument generation' is unexplained and a general reader may misread it. It should keep its exact wording but get a term-library tooltip, for example: filling in the inputs or parameters of a tool call.
These findings expose critical limitations in current agents' ability to ground reasoning within messy personal context and orchestrate reliable multi-step plans.
date — pass: originalPublished is 2026-03-02, which matches the v1 submission date. It correctly ignores the v2 revision on 5 Nov 2026 and the November feed date.
Submitted on 2 Mar 2026 (v1), last revised 5 Nov 2026 (this version, v2)
support — pass: Each claim maps to a verbatim abstract excerpt. The limitations correctly note that the abstract gives no scores or breakdowns and no evidence about real-world assistant use. The question about variation across scenarios and models follows from that gap and is not leading. The reading adds no unsupported benefits or costs.
reveals significant performance degradation under high-complexity conditions, with argument generation emerging as the primary bottleneck
media — pass: The selected media is the verified direct arXiv abstract page for this paper. It is the most direct access point to the source.
Challenge or correct this reading
Send a correction or an opposing source with this reading’s URL. Disagreement and uncertainty can remain unresolved.
A defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
Definition referenceAn AI system that chooses and carries out actions toward a goal, often using software tools.
Definition referenceClaude is Anthropic’s family of AI models and assistants for tasks such as writing, analysis and coding.
Explore ClaudearXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivarXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivA defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
Definition referenceA defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
Definition referenceAn AI system that chooses and carries out actions toward a goal, often using software tools.
Definition referenceClaude is Anthropic’s family of AI models and assistants for tasks such as writing, analysis and coding.
Explore ClaudearXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivarXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivA defined set of tests used to compare systems. Results depend on the tasks and measures selected.
Definition reference