{ "schema_version": 1, "builder_plan": { "scenario": "An agent looks good in demos, but you cannot tell which product tasks it fails.", "change": "Use the study's evaluation idea to inspect a small set of tasks with human-checked answers.", "baseline": "Your current evaluator and a manually reviewed reference set.", "steps": [ "Locate the paper's implementation and check its license, model support, data needs, and hardware requirements. Stop here if you cannot obtain the required artifacts.", "Save a small set of representative product tasks and expected outcomes. Keep evaluation tasks out of any training or tuning, and choose quality and cost limits before running.", "Run the baseline and the proposed change on identical inputs. Keep other settings fixed and repeat paired runs to expose variation.", "Save per-task outputs, failures, timings, and all usage costs. Review regressions before expanding the test." ], "measure": "Agreement with human review, missed failures, false alarms, and evaluation cost per task.", "decision": "Keep the change only if it meets your preselected quality and latency limits and improves the metric you care about after setup and operating costs. Otherwise retain the baseline. This is an exploration plan, not a validated recommendation." }, "builder_review": null, "arxiv_id": "2610.10942", "title": "StoreBench: A Live-Commerce Environment for Evaluating and Training Autonomous Operator Agents", "summary": "StoreBench replaces static agentic benchmarks with a deterministic, live-commerce RL environment using 29 merchant tools, calibrated pass thresholds, and reward-hack hardening for evaluation and GRPO post-training. It costs engineering effort to stand up a production-grade commerce backend and run multi-day simulated episodes, and the full environment and evaluation suite are withheld, so independent adoption requires reimplementing or waiting for release. It can fail because gains from training on five tasks may not transfer beyond this narrow commerce domain, the released artifacts cover only a fraction of the benchmark, and heuristic-calibrated thresholds may not reflect real business value.", "rationale": "The reader cannot adopt the benchmark since the environment is withheld, and the demonstrated GRPO gain is promising but narrow, so monitoring for release and replicating the idea on domain-specific tasks is the appropriate posture.", "technique": "Live-commerce benchmark and RL training environment (StoreBench)", "family": "avaliacao_de_agente", "recommendation": "observar", "published": "2026-10-07", "as_of": "2026-10-18", "editorial_status": "indexed", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.10942", "independent_implementations": 2, "total_implementations": 3, "stars": 136, "citations": 0, "claims": [ { "claim_id": "claim-01", "statement": "StoreBench replaces static agentic benchmarks with a deterministic, live-commerce RL environment using 29 merchant tools, calibrated pass thresholds, and reward-hack hardening for evaluation and GRPO post-training. It costs engineering effort to stand up a production-grade commerce backend and run multi-day simulated episodes, and the full environment and evaluation suite are withheld, so independent adoption requires reimplementing or waiting for release. It can fail because gains from training on five tasks may not transfer beyond this narrow commerce domain, the released artifacts cover only a fraction of the benchmark, and heuristic-calibrated thresholds may not reflect real business value.", "basis": "inferred", "result": "", "baseline": "", "conditions": "", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.10942", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "claim_id": "claim-02", "statement": "GRPO post-training of Qwen3.5-27B on five tasks raises mean composite on held-out evaluation tasks from 0.136 to 0.373 (about 2.7x); no frontier model matches a scripted heuristic (49% vs 97% pass rate).", "basis": "inferred", "result": "", "baseline": "", "conditions": "", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.10942", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" } ], "exposure_map": [ { "dimension": "quality", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "compute", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "latency", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "operations", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "compatibility", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "security", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "data_and_training", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "reproducibility", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" } ], "risks": [], "minimum_test": [], "open_questions": [], "independent_tests": [], "lab_reproductions": [], "report_available": false, "validation_tier": "unknown", "evidence_tier": "unknown", "infrastructure_basis": "unknown", "equations": [], "equations_status": "not_fetched", "core_kind": "", "equations_fetched_at": "", "equations_source_url": "", "equations_source_sha256": "", "exposures_reviewed_at": "", "exposures_source_sha256": "" }