aiqbench analysis
MedCTA introduces a rigorous benchmark for medical tool agents, revealing that even frontier models struggle with multi-step clinical workflows due to brittle planning and tool recruitment failures. The dataset's focus on clinician-validated, step-implicit tasks over multimodal inputs provides a necessary testbed for auditing agentic reliability beyond simple perception. This work underscores that strong backbone models alone are insufficient for trustworthy clinical deployment without robust process-aware evaluation.
MedCTA: A Benchmark for Clinical Tool Agents
arXiv:2606.11702v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: To make clinically grounded decisions, medical AI agents are expected to go beyond simple recognition and be capable of tool retrieval, evidence acquisition, and integration. Existing benchmarks largely evaluate isolated perception or single-turn question answering, and therefore provide limited visibility into failures of planning, tool recruitment, and rollout reliability. We introduce MedCTA, a benchmark for evaluating medical tool agents on clinician-validated, step-implicit tasks grounded in realistic multimodal clinical inputs, including radiology images, pathology slides, and reports. MedCTA comprises 107 real-world clinical tasks with clinician-verified executable trajectories over 5 deployed tools, and supports process-aware evaluation of tool selection, argument validity, execution stability, trajectory fidelity, and outcome quality. We benchmark 18 open- and closed-source multimodal models and find that even frontier systems remain brittle in multi-step clinical tool use: autonomous rollouts are dominated by protocol failures, premature stopping, and incorrect tool recruitment, while gold-standard tool routing yields large but still incomplete gains. These results show that strong backbone perception does not translate into reliable agentic behavior in clinical settings. MedCTA provides a rigorous testbed for auditing, diagnosing, and advancing trustworthy medical AI agents. The dataset and evaluation suite are available at https://ivul-kaust.github.io/MedCTA/
Abstract:To make clinically grounded decisions, medical AI agents are expected to go beyond simple recognition and be capable of tool retrieval, evidence acquisition, and integration. Existing benchmarks largely evaluate isolated perception or single-turn question answering, and therefore provide limited visibility into failures of planning, tool recruitment, and rollout reliability. We introduce MedCTA, a benchmark for evaluating medical tool agents on clinician-validated, step-implicit tasks grounded in realistic multimodal clinical inputs, including radiology images, pathology slides, and reports. MedCTA comprises 107 real-world clinical tasks with clinician-verified executable trajectories over 5 deployed tools, and supports process-aware evaluation of tool selection, argument validity, execution stability, trajectory fidelity, and outcome quality. We benchmark 18 open- and closed-source multimodal models and find that even frontier systems remain brittle in multi-step clinical tool use: autonomous rollouts are dominated by protocol failures, premature stopping, and incorrect tool recruitment, while gold-standard tool routing yields large but still incomplete gains. These results show that strong backbone perception does not translate into reliable agentic behavior in clinical settings. MedCTA provides a rigorous testbed for auditing, diagnosing, and advancing trustworthy medical AI agents. The dataset and evaluation suite are available at this https URL
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2606.11702 [cs.CV]
(or arXiv:2606.11702v1 [cs.CV] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.11702 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 296 words
Related coverage

A new benchmark for evaluating patient-facing health AI agents
Amazon Science · Jul 29, 2026

MedPAIR: Measuring Whether Physicians and AI Agree on What Matters in Medical QA
Snorkel AI Blog · Oct 2, 2026
PatientAgentBench: A Benchmark Framework for Evaluating Patient-Facing Health AI Agents
arXiv · Jul 29, 2026

Amazon Research Awards recipients announced
Amazon Science · May 27, 2026