In large-scale enterprise settings, centralized multi-agent systems (MAS) are increasingly adopted, in which a coordinator delegates user requests to lightweight, domain-specialized sub-agents. While this architecture improves modularity, scalability, and cost efficiency, its reliability depends not only on accurate routing but also on sub-agents’ ability to calibrate their responses to capability constraints. In particular, sub-agents built on smaller fine-tuned models often struggle with such calibration, leading them to over-answer ambiguous, underspecified, misrouted, or unsupported requests and produce hallucinated outputs instead of actionable feedback. To address this challenge, we present EARS (Explanatory Abstention for Reliable Sub-Agent Modeling), a production-oriented framework that reframes sub-agent abstention as an inter-agent communication protocol: a sub-agent does not merely abstain, but exposes an actionable failure state to the coordinator. EARS curates human-agent interaction data using an ensemble of calibrated LLM-as-a-Judge models, producing structured abstention labels and rationales under a taxonomy of sub-agent failure modes. These data are used to fine-tune sub-agents to detect failure conditions and return rationales for coordinator-level clarification, rerouting, or fallback. We evaluate EARS in a large-scale production e-commerce assistant supporting enterprise business intelligence workflows. EARS improves the overall response pass rate from 68.5% to 78.9%, demonstrating that sub-agent-side explanatory abstention improves MAS reliability.

Large Language Models (LLMs), exemplified by Claude and LLama, have exhibited impressive proficiency in tackling a myriad of Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks. Yet, in pursuit of the ambitious goal of attaining Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), there remains ample room for enhancing LLM capabilities. Chief among these is the pressing need to bolster long-context comprehension. Numerous real-world scenarios demand LLMs to adeptly reason across extended contexts, such as multi-turn dialogues or agent workflow. Hence, recent advancements have been dedicated to stretching the upper bounds of long-context comprehension, with models like Claude 3 accommodating up to 200k tokens, employing various techniques to achieve this feat. Aligned with this progression, we propose a leaderboard LongLeader that seeks to comprehensively assess different long-context comprehension abilities of diverse LLMs and context length extension strategies across meticulously selected benchmarks. Specifically, we aim to address the following questions: 1) Do LLMs genuinely deliver the long-context proficiency they purport? 2) Which benchmarks offer reliable metrics for evaluating long-context comprehension? 3) What technical strategies prove effective in extending the understanding of longer contexts? We streamline the evaluation process for LLMs on the benchmarks, offering open-source access to the benchmarks and maintaining a dedicated website for leaderboards. We will continuously curate new datasets and update models to the leaderboards.