@inproceedings{mazumder-lia-2026-agentcheck,
title = "{A}gent{C}heck: A Reproduce{--}Intervene{--}Mitigate Workbench for {LLM} Agents over {MCP}",
author = "Mazumder, Aritra and
Lia, Nusrat Jahan",
editor = "Agrawal, Sweta and
Abad, Alberto",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations",
month = oct,
year = "2026",
address = "Budapest, Hungary",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-demos.64/",
pages = "674--684",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-461-3",
abstract = "Tool-using LLM agents are mostly evaluated assuming all tools work. When a tool times out, returns a week-stale value, or has its description poisoned in deployment, the developer needs a controlled way to reproduce the failure, test a fix, and confirm the fix worked before deployment. We present AgentCheck, an open-source web workbench that turns an MCP server into an intervention surface. AgentCheck runs an agent against its real tools and records every tool response, then re-runs the agent with the response perturbed by a fault (12 types) injector. Matching tool calls are replayed from cache, and later tool calls go live after the agent diverges. This yields a reproduce-intervene-confirm loop: the developer toggles a mitigation, re-runs against the identical fault, and sees if the failure goes away. Scoring has two parts: deterministic pass/fail rules, plus an LLM judge for interpretive labels, validated against human annotations. Across five agents, the best passes 105/120 scenarios and the weakest only 77. The failures are usually silent, confident use of incorrect tool outputs rather than crashes. On the weakest agent, a retry mitigation raises success on timeout error faults from as few as 30{\%} of cases to 100{\%}, whereas stale-data faults remain near 3-4 of 10 regardless of the mitigation. AgentCheck makes these failure modes reproducible, comparable, and verifiable before deployment."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="mazumder-lia-2026-agentcheck">
<titleInfo>
<title>AgentCheck: A Reproduce–Intervene–Mitigate Workbench for LLM Agents over MCP</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Aritra</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Mazumder</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Nusrat</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Jahan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Lia</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-10</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Sweta</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Agrawal</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Alberto</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Abad</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Budapest, Hungary</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-461-3</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Tool-using LLM agents are mostly evaluated assuming all tools work. When a tool times out, returns a week-stale value, or has its description poisoned in deployment, the developer needs a controlled way to reproduce the failure, test a fix, and confirm the fix worked before deployment. We present AgentCheck, an open-source web workbench that turns an MCP server into an intervention surface. AgentCheck runs an agent against its real tools and records every tool response, then re-runs the agent with the response perturbed by a fault (12 types) injector. Matching tool calls are replayed from cache, and later tool calls go live after the agent diverges. This yields a reproduce-intervene-confirm loop: the developer toggles a mitigation, re-runs against the identical fault, and sees if the failure goes away. Scoring has two parts: deterministic pass/fail rules, plus an LLM judge for interpretive labels, validated against human annotations. Across five agents, the best passes 105/120 scenarios and the weakest only 77. The failures are usually silent, confident use of incorrect tool outputs rather than crashes. On the weakest agent, a retry mitigation raises success on timeout error faults from as few as 30% of cases to 100%, whereas stale-data faults remain near 3-4 of 10 regardless of the mitigation. AgentCheck makes these failure modes reproducible, comparable, and verifiable before deployment.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">mazumder-lia-2026-agentcheck</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-demos.64/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-10</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>674</start>
<end>684</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T AgentCheck: A Reproduce–Intervene–Mitigate Workbench for LLM Agents over MCP
%A Mazumder, Aritra
%A Lia, Nusrat Jahan
%Y Agrawal, Sweta
%Y Abad, Alberto
%S Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations
%D 2026
%8 October
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Budapest, Hungary
%@ 979-8-89176-461-3
%F mazumder-lia-2026-agentcheck
%X Tool-using LLM agents are mostly evaluated assuming all tools work. When a tool times out, returns a week-stale value, or has its description poisoned in deployment, the developer needs a controlled way to reproduce the failure, test a fix, and confirm the fix worked before deployment. We present AgentCheck, an open-source web workbench that turns an MCP server into an intervention surface. AgentCheck runs an agent against its real tools and records every tool response, then re-runs the agent with the response perturbed by a fault (12 types) injector. Matching tool calls are replayed from cache, and later tool calls go live after the agent diverges. This yields a reproduce-intervene-confirm loop: the developer toggles a mitigation, re-runs against the identical fault, and sees if the failure goes away. Scoring has two parts: deterministic pass/fail rules, plus an LLM judge for interpretive labels, validated against human annotations. Across five agents, the best passes 105/120 scenarios and the weakest only 77. The failures are usually silent, confident use of incorrect tool outputs rather than crashes. On the weakest agent, a retry mitigation raises success on timeout error faults from as few as 30% of cases to 100%, whereas stale-data faults remain near 3-4 of 10 regardless of the mitigation. AgentCheck makes these failure modes reproducible, comparable, and verifiable before deployment.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-demos.64/
%P 674-684
Markdown (Informal)
[AgentCheck: A Reproduce–Intervene–Mitigate Workbench for LLM Agents over MCP](https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-demos.64/) (Mazumder & Lia, EMNLP 2026)
ACL