Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Products

aiqbench analysis

The post reports that LangChain raised its deepagents-cli coding agent from 52.8% to 66.5% on Terminal Bench 2.0 by changing only the harness (system prompt, tools, and middleware) while keeping the model fixed at GPT-5.2-Codex. For AI readers, the useful part is the method: using execution traces to find failure modes and iterating on scaffolding around a fixed model. The results are vendor-reported on a single benchmark, so the gains should be checked against independent evaluations before generalizing.
Sources coveringLangChain Blog, SiliconANGLE, NVIDIA, arXiv

Improving Deep Agents with harness engineering

LangChain Blog8 min read

Harness engineering improved LangChain's coding agent from Top 30 to Top 5 on Terminal Bench using self-verification, tracing, and context optimization.

TLDR: Our coding agent went from Top 30 to Top 5 on Terminal Bench 2.0. We only changed the harness. Here’s our approach to harness engineering (teaser: self-verification & tracing help a lot). The goal of a harness is to mold the inherently spiky intelligence of a model for tasks we care about. Harness Engineering is about systems, you’re building tooling around the model to optimize goals like task performance, token efficiency, latency, etc. Design decisions include the system prompt, tool choice, and execution flow. But how should you change the harness to improve your agent? At LangChain, we use Traces to understand agent failure modes at scale. Models today are largely black-boxes, their inner mechanisms are hard to interpret. But we can see their inputs and outputs in text space which we then use in our improvement loops. We used a simple recipe to iteratively improve deepagents-cli (our coding agent) 13.7 points from 52.8 to 66.5 on Terminal Bench 2.0. We only tweaked the harness…

Excerpt shown under the publisher's RSS terms · 166 words · full text and figures are on the publisher's site

Related coverage