ComboShoppingBench - Response Quality: leaderboard

ComboShoppingBench (arXiv 2608.09282v1, Table 2): 22 tool-using agent configurations, 11 models each with thinking enabled and disabled, on 291 compositional shopping tasks over a frozen catalog with coupons and budgets. Share of final responses passing all five response-quality criteria, judged by Gemini-3.1-Pro-Preview, which is also an evaluated agent; percent, higher is better.

Metric: Pass rate (%; LLM-judged). Source: arxiv.org. Saturation forecast: Estimated already saturated. 22 models tracked.

Top models

#ModelScoreOverall rank
1Claude Opus 4.8 (Thinking)96.6#39 (Claude Opus 4.8)
2Gemini 3.1 Pro (Preview) (Thinking)93.8#64 (Gemini 3.1 Pro (Preview))
3GPT-5.5 (Non-reasoning)93.1#33 (GPT-5.5)
4Kimi K2.6 (Thinking)92.8#113 (Kimi K2.6)
5GPT-5.592.4#33
6Claude Opus 4.6 (Thinking)92.1#67 (Claude Opus 4.6)
7GLM-5.2 (Non-reasoning)90.7#80 (GLM-5.2)
8Qwen 3.6 27B (Thinking)78.4#182 (Qwen 3.6 27B)
9Kimi K2.6 (Non-reasoning)75.6#113 (Kimi K2.6)
10MiniMax-M3 (Thinking)72.5#151 (MiniMax-M3)
11Claude Opus 4.8 (Non-reasoning)70.1#39 (Claude Opus 4.8)
12Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Non-reasoning)68.4#94 (Claude Sonnet 4.6)
13Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Thinking)59.8#94 (Claude Sonnet 4.6)
14Qwen 3.6 27B (Non-reasoning)51.2#182 (Qwen 3.6 27B)
15Claude Opus 4.6 (Non-reasoning)19.6#67 (Claude Opus 4.6)

No result here: #3 Claude Opus 5.5, #6 GPT-6 Astra, #7 GPT-6.1 Sol.

Interactive version: theaggregate.ai/benchmark?slug=comboshoppingbench-response-quality · How It Works · Data refreshed daily, snapshot 2026-11-05.