OSWorld2.0: Benchmarking Computer Use Agents on Long-Horizon Real-World Tasks
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.
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
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
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.
WeaveBench: A Long-Horizon, Real-World Benchmark for Computer-Use Agents with Hybrid Interfaces
WeaveBench is a new benchmark for evaluating computer-use agents across multiple interfaces (GUI, CLI, code) in long-horizon real-world tasks. It reveals that current models achieve only 41.2% PassRate and that outcome-only grading overestimates performance, highlighting significant gaps in evaluation.
GTA-2: Benchmarking General Tool Agents from Atomic Tool-Use to Open-Ended Workflows
GTA-2 introduces a hierarchical benchmark for evaluating general tool agents across atomic tool-use and open-ended workflows, revealing a significant capability cliff where frontier models achieve only 14.39% success on complex tasks despite reasonable atomic performance.
TOBench: A Task-Oriented Omni-Modal Benchmark for Real-World Tool-Using Agents
TOBench is a new benchmark for evaluating AI agents on real-world, task-oriented tool use with multimodal inputs and closed-loop verification. Experiments show top models like Qwen 3.5 Plus achieve only 41% success, far below the 94% human benchmark, highlighting a significant gap.