OSWorld2.0: Benchmarking Computer Use Agents on Long-Horizon Real-World Tasks

Hugging Face Daily Papers Papers

Summary

OSWorld 2.0 is a new benchmark for evaluating computer-use agents on 108 long-horizon, real-world workflows. Current agents like Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 achieve low completion rates, highlighting significant limitations in handling complex, multi-step tasks.

Existing computer-use benchmarks fail to capture the realism, complexity, and long-horizon demands of real-world computer use, limiting their ability to reveal the limitations of frontier agents. We introduce OSWorld 2.0, a benchmark of 108 long-horizon computer-use workflows across everyday and professional tasks, designed to capture complex and challenging real-world phenomena. Each task represents a realistic end-to-end workflow that takes human users a median of about 1.6 hours to complete and requires an average of 318 tool calls with Claude Opus 4.7 using maximum thinking, compared with about 30 in OSWorld 1.0. OSWorld 2.0 targets challenge phenomena that are common in real workflows yet underrepresented in prior benchmarks, spanning interaction-design challenges such as streaming interaction and dynamic environments, as well as agent-pattern challenges such as cross-source reasoning, implicit-state inference, and visual-spatial precision. Tasks are grounded in authentic input artifacts and cross-referenced against realistic stateful user profile data, and include separate safety reports auditing safety-sensitive execution. Under our primary binary-completion metric at 500 steps, Claude Opus 4.8 with maximum thinking and batched tool calls scores best but still completes only 20.6% of tasks at a 54.8% partial score; GPT-5.5 is far more token-efficient yet plateaus near 13%. These results show that current agents are still far from professional-level computer use: rather than stumbling on basic GUI control or coding, they lose track of constraints, miss information that arrives mid-task, guess rather than ask the user, and skip verification, struggling most when a task hinges on hidden state they must recover.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 06/30/26, 07:35 AM

Paper page - OSWorld2.0: Benchmarking Computer Use Agents on Long-Horizon Real-World Tasks

Source: https://huggingface.co/papers/2606.29537 Authors:

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

Abstract

OSWorld 2.0 presents a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating computer-use agents through complex, real-world workflows that reveal current limitations in agent reasoning and task completion.

Existing computer-use benchmarks fail to capture the realism, complexity, and long-horizon demands of real-world computer use, limiting their ability to reveal the limitations of frontier agents. We introduce OSWorld 2.0, a benchmark of 108 long-horizoncomputer-use workflowsacross everyday and professional tasks, designed to capture complex and challenging real-world phenomena. Each task represents a realistic end-to-end workflow that takes human users a median of about 1.6 hours to complete and requires an average of 318tool callswith Claude Opus 4.7 using maximum thinking, compared with about 30 in OSWorld 1.0. OSWorld 2.0 targets challenge phenomena that are common in real workflows yet underrepresented in prior benchmarks, spanning interaction-design challenges such as streaming interaction and dynamic environments, as well asagent-pattern challengessuch ascross-source reasoning,implicit-state inference, andvisual-spatial precision. Tasks are grounded in authentic input artifacts and cross-referenced against realistic stateful user profile data, and include separatesafety reportsauditing safety-sensitive execution. Under our primarybinary-completion metricat 500 steps, Claude Opus 4.8 with maximum thinking and batchedtool callsscores best but still completes only 20.6% of tasks at a 54.8% partial score; GPT-5.5 is far more token-efficient yet plateaus near 13%. These results show that current agents are still far from professional-level computer use: rather than stumbling on basic GUI control or coding, they lose track of constraints, miss information that arrives mid-task, guess rather than ask the user, and skip verification, struggling most when a task hinges on hidden state they must recover.

View arXiv pageView PDFProject pageGitHub104Add to collection

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2606\.29537

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/2606.29537 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2606.29537 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2606.29537 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.

MyPCBench: A Benchmark for Personally Intelligent Computer-Use Agents

Hugging Face Daily Papers

MyPCBench evaluates computer-use agents as personal assistants in a simulated Linux desktop environment with real-world web applications, revealing that Claude Opus 4.6 achieves the highest task completion rate of 55.4% while struggling with multi-application tasks and long trajectories.