Bassam Adnan

Bassam Adnan, Aviral Gupta, Sreemaee Akshathala et al.

Benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) have progressed from snippet-level function generation to repository-level issue resolution, yet they overwhelmingly target implementation correctness. Software architecture tasks remain under-specified and difficult to compare across models, despite their central role in maintaining and evolving complex systems. We present ArchBench, the first unified platform for benchmarking LLM capabilities on software architecture tasks. ArchBench provides a command-line tool with a standardized pipeline for dataset download, inference with trajectory logging, and automated evaluation, alongside a public web interface with an interactive leaderboard. The platform is built around a plugin architecture where each task is a self-contained module, making it straightforward for the community to contribute new architectural tasks and evaluation results. We use the term LLMs broadly to encompass generative AI (GenAI) solutions for software engineering, including both standalone models and LLM-based coding agents equipped with tools. Both the CLI tool and the web platform are openly available to support reproducible research and community-driven growth of architectural benchmarking.

Sreemaee Akshathala, Bassam Adnan, Mahisha Ramesh et al.

Recent advances in agentic AI have shifted the focus from standalone Large Language Models (LLMs) to integrated systems that combine LLMs with tools, memory, and other agents to perform complex tasks. These multi-agent architectures enable coordinated reasoning, planning, and execution across diverse domains, allowing agents to collaboratively automate complex workflows. Despite these advances, evaluation and assessment of LLM agents and the multi-agent systems they constitute remain a fundamental challenge. Although various approaches have been proposed in the software engineering literature for evaluating conventional software components, existing methods for AI-based systems often overlook the non-deterministic nature of models. This non-determinism introduces behavioral uncertainty during execution, yet existing evaluations rely on binary task completion metrics that fail to capture it. Evaluating agentic systems therefore requires examining additional dimensions, including the agent ability to invoke tools, ingest and retrieve memory, collaborate with other agents, and interact effectively with its environment. These challenges emerged during our ongoing industry collaboration with MontyCloud Inc., when we deployed an agentic system in production. These limitations surfaced during deployment, highlighting practical gaps in the current evaluation methods and the need for a systematic assessment of agent behavior beyond task outcomes. Informed by these observations and established definitions of agentic systems, we propose an end-to-end Agent Assessment Framework with four evaluation pillars encompassing LLMs, Memory, Tools, and Environment. We validate the framework on a representative Autonomous CloudOps use case, where experiments reveal behavioral deviations overlooked by conventional metrics, demonstrating its effectiveness in capturing runtime uncertainties.