ArXiv

ORCA-bench: How Ready Are Language Model Agents for Oncall?

Authors
Albert Gong, Kyuseong Choi, Abhineet Agarwal...
Categories
cs.CL, cs.AI, cs.SE
arXiv
https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.28545v1
PDF
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.28545v1

Brief

ORCA-bench evaluates LLM-based coding agents on realistic oncall root-cause analysis by pairing a six-day, OpenTelemetry-instrumented microservice testbed (50 GB; Prometheus/Jaeger/OpenSearch) and full source access with 1,079 SRE-curated RCA tasks that vary report specificity and co-occurring faults. Results show frontier agents (incl. Claude Fable 5) achieve only 25.3% accuracy on Medium and 10.0% on Hard tasks, with 40% hallucination rates for the weakest model; authors argue this underestimates the true gap to production readiness. (Summary based on the paper abstract.)

Why it matters

ORCA-bench pairs a live OpenTelemetry‑instrumented microservice testbed (six days of telemetry, ~50 GB, exposed via Prometheus, Jaeger, OpenSearch/Grafana) and full source code with 1,079 curated RCA tasks that vary report specificity, time-to-detection, and co-occurring faults; ground-truth symptoms were signed off by expert SREs and the LLM judge was re-scored by humans (Cohen's κ_w = 0.90).

Key details

  • Across five frontier coding agents (including Claude Fable 5), the best RCA Accuracy is 25.3% on Medium-difficulty (realistic-input) tasks and 10.0% on Hard tasks; the weakest model hallucinates an implausible root cause in 40% of incident reports, and removing source-code access degrades every metric.
  • The authors emphasize these results are a lower bound on the engineering gap—because the public 50 GB / six-day testbed is far smaller and simpler than real production systems—and they release the benchmark at https://hub.harborframework.com/datasets/orca-bench/ORCA-bench.
Source evidence

Abstract

Large language models can write, patch, and search code, but oncall root cause analysis (RCA) demands something different: reasoning over noisy metrics, logs, traces, and source code, starting from ambiguous user-facing reports, often hours after the incident began. We introduce ORCA-bench, a benchmark that puts general-purpose coding agents in a production-fidelity oncall setting. ORCA-bench pairs a live OpenTelemetry-instrumented microservice system--exposing six days of metrics, logs, and traces through real telemetry interfaces (Prometheus, Jaeger, and OpenSearch via Grafana) and full source-code access--with 1,079 RCA tasks that systematically vary report specificity, time-to-detection, and co-occurring fault scenarios. Ground-truth symptoms are curated and signed off by expert SREs, and our LLM-as-judge is independently re-scored by humans (Cohen's $κ_w=0.90$). Across five frontier agents, the best RCA Accuracy is 25.3% on Medium-difficulty tasks (the realistic-input setting) and 10.0% on Hard--a gap that remains even with Claude Fable 5. The weakest model hallucinates an implausible root cause in 40% of incident reports, and removing source-code access degrades every metric. Crucially, these are performances on a curated 50 GB / six-day testbed with tasks investigated in isolation on a system whose code and instrumentation are public. Since real production systems are order of magnitudes larger, more dynamic, and more idiosyncratic, the gap we report is a lower bound on the engineering investment required before frontier coding agents can be safely entrusted with production reliability. We release the public set at https://hub.harborframework.com/datasets/orca-bench/ORCA-bench.