HFEPX · Eval paper review
Sarath Shekkizhar, Prathyusha Jwalapuram, Zixuan Ke, Vaidehi Patil +11 more
Published
Oct 14, 2026
Citations
0
Trust level
Low
Usefulness score
0/100 (Low)
Extraction confidence
15% (Low)
Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.
Rater population
Not reported
Signals refreshed
Oct 15, 2026
This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.
Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.
All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.
Best use
Background context only
Use if you need
A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.
What to verify
Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.
Main weakness
This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.
If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here
Agents are increasingly interacting with other agents that act for different principals (people or organizations on whose behalf they work), such as a buyer's personal agent negotiating with an enterprise's seller agent. In such agent-to-agent (A2A) scenarios, each agent has its own environment and holds information and authority that the other cannot see. Moreover, the interests of each agent may be aligned (cooperative), partly aligned (mixed-motive), or opposed (competitive). Existing multi-agent system failure studies assume one orchestrator, shared workspace, or single principal. We ask how A2A systems fail when these assumptions are removed. We study more than 2,500 recorded runs of A2A systems built from different agent harnesses and models, spanning 488 scenarios across eight families (legal, CRM, security, commerce, etc.). From these traces, we derive $A^2$-Failures, a taxonomy of 20 A2A failure modes in four categories: (i) discovery and delegation, (ii) grounding and record consistency, (iii) verification, and (iv) conduct and fidelity. Three findings hold across every harness, model, and scenario studied: (1) discovery and interaction are driven by the phrasing of the task rather than the availability of peer agents; (2) no agent verifies a peer's factual claim on its own initiative, so an A2A system inherits the reliability of its least reliable participant unless the protocol or mechanism performs the check; and (3) the aggregate outcome score credits the agent completing the task while staying blind to the coordination, verification, and conduct failures beneath it, so A2A systems must be evaluated per agent, against each agent's own principal. We release the run logs behind the taxonomy at https://huggingface.co/datasets/a2a-salesforce/a2-failures.
These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.
None explicit
No explicit feedback protocol extracted.
"Agents are increasingly interacting with other agents that act for different principals (people or organizations on whose behalf they work), such as a buyer's personal agent negotiating with an enterprise's seller agent."
None explicit
Validate eval design from full paper text.
"Agents are increasingly interacting with other agents that act for different principals (people or organizations on whose behalf they work), such as a buyer's personal agent negotiating with an enterprise's seller agent."
Not reported
No explicit QC controls found.
"Agents are increasingly interacting with other agents that act for different principals (people or organizations on whose behalf they work), such as a buyer's personal agent negotiating with an enterprise's seller agent."
Not extracted
No benchmark anchors detected.
"Agents are increasingly interacting with other agents that act for different principals (people or organizations on whose behalf they work), such as a buyer's personal agent negotiating with an enterprise's seller agent."
Not extracted
No metric anchors detected.
"Agents are increasingly interacting with other agents that act for different principals (people or organizations on whose behalf they work), such as a buyer's personal agent negotiating with an enterprise's seller agent."
No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.
No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.
Agents are increasingly interacting with other agents that act for different principals (people or organizations on whose behalf they work), such as a buyer's personal agent negotiating with an enterprise's seller agent.
Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.
Human feedback protocol is explicit
No explicit human feedback protocol detected.
Evaluation mode is explicit
No clear evaluation mode extracted.
Quality control reporting appears
No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.
Benchmark or dataset anchors are present
No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.
Metric reporting is present
No metric terms extracted.
