Unspecified benchmark
LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability Leaderboard
LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability is a current leaderboard reporting Agent Score as a ratio.
Updated Oct 23, 2026
Models44
Model coverage44
MetricAgent Score
EvidenceA
LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability Ranking
Higher agent score ranks better on this benchmark.
Sort by
Rank | Model | Agent Score | Percentile | Participants | Observations | Evidence | Evaluated |
|---|
| Rank01 | ModelAN | Agent Score15.48% (14.66% - 16.29%) | Percentile100.00% | Participants44 | Observations74.4K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank02 | ModelOP | Agent Score13.03% (11.52% - 14.55%) | Percentile97.67% | Participants44 | Observations20.1K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank03 | ModelOP | Agent Score12.04% (11.09% - 12.99%) | Percentile95.35% | Participants44 | Observations79.7K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank04 | ModelAN | Agent Score11.95% (10.63% - 13.28%) | Percentile93.02% | Participants44 | Observations47.5K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank05 | ModelAN | Agent Score11.19% (10.36% - 12.02%) | Percentile90.70% | Participants44 | Observations84.4K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank06 | ModelGO | Agent Score10.93% (10.42% - 11.44%) | Percentile88.37% | Participants44 | Observations521K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank07 | ModelAN | Agent Score10.60% (9.65% - 11.56%) | Percentile86.05% | Participants44 | Observations75.4K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank08 | ModelOP | Agent Score10.13% (8.26% - 11.99%) | Percentile83.72% | Participants44 | Observations19.6K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank09 | ModelXA | Agent Score9.54% (8.48% - 10.59%) | Percentile81.40% | Participants44 | Observations54.8K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank10 | ModelXA | Agent Score9.37% (8.69% - 10.04%) | Percentile79.07% | Participants44 | Observations188K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank11 | ModelOP | Agent Score9.19% (7.82% - 10.56%) | Percentile76.74% | Participants44 | Observations25.1K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank12 | ModelAN | Agent Score7.31% (6.72% - 7.91%) | Percentile74.42% | Participants44 | Observations343.3K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank13 | ModelOP | Agent Score6.98% (6.02% - 7.94%) | Percentile72.09% | Participants44 | Observations133.4K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank14 | ModelGO | Agent Score6.70% (5.42% - 7.97%) | Percentile69.77% | Participants44 | Observations140.2K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank15 | ModelAC | Agent Score4.49% (1.73% - 7.26%) | Percentile67.44% | Participants44 | Observations34.3K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank16 | ModelRA | Agent Score4.30% (0.69% - 7.91%) | Percentile65.12% | Participants44 | Observations87.1K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank17 | ModelXI | Agent Score3.75% (3.13% - 4.37%) | Percentile62.79% | Participants44 | Observations412.8K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank18 | ModelTM | Agent Score2.90% (-0.41% - 6.20%) | Percentile60.47% | Participants44 | Observations12.2K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank19 | ModelGO | Agent Score2.64% (-0.55% - 5.82%) | Percentile58.14% | Participants44 | Observations24.5K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank20 | ModelME | Agent Score2.21% (1.39% - 3.04%) | Percentile55.81% | Participants44 | Observations431.6K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank21 | ModelDE | Agent Score2.20% (0.89% - 3.51%) | Percentile53.49% | Participants44 | Observations81.4K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank22 | ModelAC | Agent Score1.66% (-1.56% - 4.87%) | Percentile51.16% | Participants44 | Observations23.5K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank23 | ModelOP | Agent Score1.64% (0.09% - 3.20%) | Percentile48.84% | Participants44 | Observations43.9K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank24 | ModelMA | Agent Score1.06% (-0.65% - 2.77%) | Percentile46.51% | Participants44 | Observations89.7K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank25 | ModelOP | Agent Score1.05% (-0.34% - 2.44%) | Percentile44.19% | Participants44 | Observations73.3K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank26 | ModelTM | Agent Score0.68% (-3.39% - 4.76%) | Percentile41.86% | Participants44 | Observations12.1K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank27 | ModelAC | Agent Score0.06% (-0.62% - 0.74%) | Percentile39.53% | Participants44 | Observations418.7K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank28 | ModelXI | Agent Score-0.13% (-2.17% - 1.92%) | Percentile37.21% | Participants44 | Observations51.9K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank29 | ModelMI | Agent Score-0.42% (-2.76% - 1.92%) | Percentile34.88% | Participants44 | Observations50.8K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
| Rank30 | ModelME | Agent Score-1.84% (-3.35% - -0.33%) | Percentile32.56% | Participants44 | Observations255.1K | EvidenceA | Evaluated |
LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability Highlights
The leading models and scores on this benchmark.
LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability Score Distribution
A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.
The Top AI Models for LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability
The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.
What is LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability?
What LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability measures and how its scores work.
LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability is a benchmark leaderboard.
It reports Agent Score, measured as a ratio.
Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is verified and has an evidence level of A.
- Family
- lm-arena-agent-bash-reliability
- Modality
- Unspecified
- Primary category
- Unspecified
- Score direction
- higher
- LLMBoard eligible
- No
- Evaluation key
- overall
LM Arena. Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.
FAQ
Common questions about LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability.
Which model scores highest on LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability?
Claude Sonnet 5 is currently ranked first with 15.48%.
What are the top three models on LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability?
The current leaders are Claude Sonnet 5 (15.48%), GPT-5.5 (13.03%), and GPT-5.6 Sol (12.04%).
Which LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability model has the lowest official input price?
Claude Haiku 5.5 has the lowest matched official input price at $0.10 input / $0.50 output per 1M tokens.
Which models are fastest among LM Arena Agent Bash Reliability results?
The fastest matched records are Gemini 3.7 Flash (409.96 tok/s via Google), GPT-5.6 Luna (215.52 tok/s via OpenAI), and Gemini 3.1 Pro (90.00 tok/s via Google).
Does the highest agent score result prove overall model quality?
No. This benchmark measures one defined capability or task. The overall LLMBoard score uses a separate aggregation across eligible benchmark evidence.