StartupBench: Benchmarking General-Purpose Agents on Market-Validated End-to-End Workflows

Hugging Face Daily Papers Papers

Summary

StartupBench introduces a benchmark for evaluating general-purpose AI agents on real-world startup workflows, revealing that top models complete only about 30% of tasks due to gaps in complex instruction following and domain-specific expertise.

Recent advances in Large Language Models(LLMs) and agents have substantially improved the ability of AI systems to execute complex tasks. Yet existing benchmarks largely rely on researcher-selected tasks, leaving uncertain whether such progress extends to the work that real-world users actually demand from AI systems. We introduce StartupBench, an E2E agent benchmark grounded in market-validated AI startup products. Rather than defining tasks from pre-defined assumptions about useful agent capabilities, we systematically study AI products with demonstrated adoption, together with their product workflows and users, to identify real-world tasks for which AI has established practical demand across diverse professional domains. We translate these workflows into complete deliverable-oriented tasks and evaluate them with fine-grained rubrics capturing their complex requirements. Across representative models evaluated under a unified agent harness, even the strongest model successfully completes only approximately 30\% of StartupBench, despite making substantial partial progress on many tasks. Further analysis identifies aspects like complex instruction following and domain-specific expertise as major sources of failure. Our results reveal that many market-validated workflows remain beyond the reliable capabilities of current general-purpose agents, establishing StartupBench as an empirical measure of progress toward E2E completions of real-world user tasks.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 08/19/26, 03:58 AM

Paper page - StartupBench: Benchmarking General-Purpose Agents on Market-Validated End-to-End Workflows

Source: https://huggingface.co/papers/2608.17800 Authors:

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

Abstract

StartupBench evaluates end-to-end AI agents on real-world startup workflows and reveals that even top models complete only about 30% of tasks, highlighting gaps in instruction following and domain expertise.

Recent advances inLarge Language Models(LLMs) andagentshave substantially improved the ability of AI systems to execute complex tasks. Yet existing benchmarks largely rely on researcher-selected tasks, leaving uncertain whether such progress extends to the work that real-world users actually demand from AI systems. We introduceStartupBench, anE2E agent benchmarkgrounded in market-validated AI startup products. Rather than defining tasks from pre-defined assumptions about useful agent capabilities, we systematically study AI products with demonstrated adoption, together with their product workflows and users, to identify real-world tasks for which AI has established practical demand across diverse professional domains. We translate these workflows into complete deliverable-oriented tasks and evaluate them with fine-grained rubrics capturing their complex requirements. Across representative models evaluated under a unifiedagent harness, even the strongest model successfully completes only approximately 30\% ofStartupBench, despite making substantial partial progress on many tasks. Further analysis identifies aspects likecomplex instruction followinganddomain-specific expertiseas major sources of failure. Our results reveal that many market-validated workflows remain beyond the reliable capabilities of current general-purposeagents, establishingStartupBenchas an empirical measure of progress toward E2E completions of real-world user tasks.

View arXiv pageView PDFProject pageAdd to collection

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2608\.17800

Don’t have the latest CLI?curl \-LsSf https://hf\.co/cli/install\.sh \| bash

Models citing this paper0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2608.17800 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2608.17800 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2608.17800 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to acollectionto link it from this page.

Similar Articles

WorkBench Revisited: Workplace Agents Two Years On

arXiv cs.CL

This paper revisits the WorkBench benchmark for workplace agents two years after its initial release, showing that the best agent (Claude Opus 4.8) now completes 89% of tasks with only 2.5% harmful side effects, compared to GPT-4's 43% completion and 26% harm rate in 2024. It finds that capability and safety improve together, open-weight models have drastically lowered costs, and some basic mistakes persist.

JobBench: Aligning Agent Work With Human Will

arXiv cs.AI

JobBench is a benchmark built from worker surveys to evaluate AI agents on tasks that workers most want automated, covering 130 tasks across 35 professions with detailed rubrics.