- The paper introduces CFAgentBench, a reproducible benchmark that rigorously evaluates autonomous construction-finance agents using money-movement safeguards and multi-tier reliability measures.
- The paper details a layered environment architecture across 35 applications and 8 domains, ensuring deterministic state transitions and reproducible testing conditions.
- The paper shows that single-attempt accuracy hides reliability collapse, emphasizing the need for consistent performance in high-consequence construction-finance workflows.
CFAgentBench: A Reproducible Benchmark for Autonomous Construction-Finance Agents
CFAgentBench addresses the critical gap in evaluating autonomous agents for construction finance, a vertical characterized by job-cost-driven accounting, heterogeneity of systems, exception-heavy workflows, fragmented identity mappings, pervasive portal usage, and document-based ground truth. Unlike prior agent benchmarks that focus on consumer applications or standard tool-use domains, construction finance demands rigorous, functional state changes across ERP, project management, payroll, compliance, document repositories, and bank portals, all reconciled to a unified company book. The risk associated with incorrect financial actions in this domain mandates not just high accuracy but measurable reliability, with enforceable controls on money movement; single unauthorized payments or miscoded jobs are intolerable for controls-focused CFOs.
CFAgentBench operationalizes these requirements by constructing a reproducible and self-hostable environment with deterministic grading on functional correctness, extending concepts from WebArena (Zhou et al., 2023), SWE-bench (Jimenez et al., 2023), Ï„-bench (Yao et al., 2024), AppWorld (Trivedi et al., 2024), and ToolBench/Gorilla (Qin et al., 2023, Patil et al., 2023). Its unique contribution is the explicit modeling and evaluation of money-movement guards and domain-specific system constraints.
Environment Architecture and Application Surface
The benchmark comprises 35 applications instantiated from 9 archetypes (ERP, Bank, Payroll, FieldTime, Project Management, Pay Application, Lien/Certified Payroll/Tax, Integration/Estimating, Docs/Office), each implementing a uniform six-capability app contract (seed, serve, snapshot, reset, state_diff, guarded_calls). This contract enforces determinism, reproducibility, and composability, enabling both in-process and HTTP-based deployments via parameterized Docker containers. Every app is seeded from a canonical company snapshot, and discrepancies across systems are documented and deliberately keyed. Money-movement endpoints (payments, payroll release, wire initiation, e-signature, e-filing) are strictly mocked, returning only staged, non-mutated states and ensuring no agent can pass via executing real transactions.
Tier-A (fully simulated), Tier-B (real-system Docker snapshots), and Tier-C (live read-only shims) provide layered fidelity, although all reported results leverage Tier-A. Each environment instance is reset, seeded, and snapshotted per task attempt, guaranteeing deterministic reproducibility and contamination control.
Dataset, Task Families, and Provenance
CFAgentBench v1 offers 1,014 machine-gradeable tasks across 8 domains (AP/Procurement, Reporting/Compliance, Project Accounting, Cross-system, Payroll/HR, Billing, Cash/Treasury, GL/Close) and 77 families. Instances capture realistic workflows, each grounded in primary sources (CFMA community threads, NAHB builder forums, "Finance at the Jobsite" podcast episodes, vendor documentation, customer emails/calls), with provenance recorded at the instance level.
Task schemas specify the systems involved, instruction text, governing policy references, defect/adversarial variants, expected/forbidden state diffs, money-movement guards, required output regexes, difficulty (equivalent human time), role persona, split partitioning, and contamination metadata. Oracle-validated executable evaluators are compiled for 40 tasks (54 with the PM extension), ensuring soundness of the assessment pipeline.
Evaluation Methodology
Grading prioritizes functional correctness of state transitions, aligning with the two-list control principle (expected and forbidden diffs). The layered grader checks:
- L1: Primary—expected state_diff
- Forbidden: Side-effect—no disallowed mutations
- Required outputs: Regex/string assertions on narrative replies
- L2: Structured call AST validation (where needed)
- L3: LLM judge for reply quality (never as reward signal)
The unique money-movement guard is enforced as a hard gate: any executed money movement (even when correct) fails the task; proper staging passes. Reliability is measured via pass1 (single attempt) and passk (k repeat passes), capturing the probability of consistent performance, not just capability.
Statistical power is calibrated by split sizes. The full public test set (n=569) can yield a 95% Wilson half-width of ±4.1% on accuracy; current experimental runs (n=40) have wider intervals (±0.15).
Experimental Results
A sweep of three open-weight agents (DeepSeek-V3.1, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct, Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct) was performed on the 40-task oracle-validated suite. Major findings:
Reliability collapse: DeepSeek-V3.1 achieves pass1=0.67, but only pass5=0.38—a 43% drop when requiring consistency across five runs. Both Qwen agents show smaller collapses, establishing that single-attempt accuracy overstates real-world, deployable competence.
Domain heterogeneity: Notable reversals and gaps emerged. DeepSeek is markedly superior in Project Accounting, while both Qwen models are dominant in Billing. All models fail at cross-system synchronization and AP coding/holds (hard frontier).
Model size does not guarantee performance: Qwen2.5-72B numerically outperforms the larger Qwen3-235B on both pass1 and pass5, although confidence intervals overlap.
Money-movement guard compliance: All scored models comply, no forbidden movement executed.
Project Management surface diversification: Addition of four PM apps (RedTeam, ingenious.build, Ressio, SmarteBuild) preserved model ranking and surfaced platform-specific task difficulty, especially in multi-app cross-system reconciliation.
Cost efficiency: Open-weight sweeps cost pass10\$\mathrm{pass}^11∼\mathrm{pass}^1$212–\$57 sweep for frontier models).
Implications and Future Directions
Practical Implications
CFAgentBench enables rigorous measurement of finance agent reliability—not demonstration—across realistic, reconciled software stacks. The explicit money-movement guard directly reflects best practices in internal controls. The observed reliability collapse is a cautionary signal: deploying agents based on single-attempt leaderboards is misleading. Controllers should demand pass13 reliability, not capability alone.
Theoretical Perspectives
This benchmark grounds the evaluation of vertical-domain agents in functional correctness and safety constraints, providing a model-neutral testbed for architectural improvements, tool-use routines, and controls-integrated policies. Reliability collapse and domain heterogeneity signal deep misalignment between surface-level text plausibility and robust, composable action planning—a challenge for agent architectures in high-consequence workflows. The money-movement guard is an operationalization of system-level safety protocols, not merely dataset annotation.
Future Directions
- Scaling up the executable suite to the full public split (pass14) for high-powered model ranking.
- Introducing proprietary frontier models (Claude, GPT-4 family) with open-weight comparison to test generalization of reliability collapse.
- High-fidelity Tier-B/C deployments for more realistic system simulation.
- Gold trajectory demonstration and detailed failure analysis (defect clustering, money-guard behavior splits).
- Quarterly refresh of contamination-protected splits, guarding against train-on-test leakage.
Conclusion
CFAgentBench establishes a reproducible, functionally-graded, controls-driven benchmark for autonomous construction-finance agents. Its principled environment, task groundedness, and layered evaluation surface robust signals: single-attempt accuracy overstates competence, reliability collapses under repetition, and domain/task heterogeneity exposes architectural weaknesses. The money-movement guard is central—safety by default is measured as a first-class outcome, not a mere aspiration. Future research must extend reliability metrics and contamination controls, intersect agent architectures with system-level safety modeling, and shift the field toward deployable competence under real-world finance constraints. CFAgentBench will serve as a living benchmark, supporting open, rigorous comparison across models and promoting standards of reliability and safety aligned with professional finance practice.