reasoning benchmark
Tau-bench is a benchmark for tool-agent-user interaction in retail and airline domains.
Updated Sep 5, 2026
Higher score ranks better on this benchmark.
Rank | Model | Score | Percentile | Participants | Evidence | Evaluated |
|---|
| Rank01 | ModelST | Score88.20% | Percentile100.00% | Participants6 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank02 | ModelZA | Score87.40% | Percentile80.00% | Participants6 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank03 | ModelXI | Score80.30% | Percentile60.00% | Participants6 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank04 | ModelZA | Score79.50% | Percentile40.00% | Participants6 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank05 | ModelMI | Score77.20% | Percentile20.00% | Participants6 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
| Rank06 | ModelOP | Score63.00% | Percentile0.00% | Participants6 | EvidenceC | Evaluated |
The leading models and scores on this benchmark.
A closer view of the leading scores on this benchmark.
The first five results on this benchmark, with official price and output speed added where the model identity can be matched.
What Tau-bench measures and how its scores work.
Tau-bench tests language agents in dynamic conversations with users, API tools, and domain-specific policy guidelines.
It measures agents' ability to follow domain-specific rules and evaluates the consistency and reliability of their behavior over multiple trials using a Score reported as a ratio.
Scores are shown in ratio. This benchmark is not independently verified and has an evidence level of B.
LLM Stats. Benchmark scores retain their original unit. Overall score eligibility is shown separately.
Common questions about Tau-bench.
Step-3.5-Flash is currently ranked first with 88.20%.
The current leaders are Step-3.5-Flash (88.20%), GLM-4.7 (87.40%), and MiMo-V2-Flash (80.30%).
Step-3.5-Flash has the lowest matched official input price at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per 1M tokens.
The fastest matched records are MiniMax M2 (70.00 tok/s via MiniMax), GLM-4.7-Flash (50.00 tok/s via ZAI), and o3 (50.00 tok/s via OpenAI).
No. This benchmark measures one defined capability or task. The overall LLMBoard score uses a separate aggregation across eligible benchmark evidence.
It measures agents' ability to follow domain-specific rules and evaluates the consistency and reliability of their behavior over multiple trials using a Score reported as a ratio.
Yes. Higher values rank better for this benchmark.
6 model results are currently shown.
No. This benchmark is shown for reference but does not contribute to the overall score.
Ranking basisThis tau-bench AI model leaderboard uses descending score in the benchmark original unit. The leaderboard ranking keeps matched price and speed data separate from benchmark evidence.
Selection summary
Step-3.5-Flash currently leads Tau-bench with 88.20%. It is the top model on this specific benchmark, while the best LLM for the broader task should also be checked against other benchmarks, price, and runtime.
Use this leaderboard with the supporting benchmark results and coverage details above. A leaderboard position summarizes the selected ranking signal; it does not replace workload-specific testing.