Magentic-One: A Generalist Multi-Agent System for Solving Complex Tasks
Open accessAbstract
Modern AI agents, driven by advances in large foundation models, promise to enhance our productivity and transform our lives by augmenting our knowledge and capabilities. To achieve this vision, AI agents must effectively plan, perform multi-step reasoning and actions, respond to novel observations, and recover from errors, to successfully complete complex tasks across a wide range of scenarios. In this work, we introduce Magentic-One, a high-performing open-source agentic system for solving such tasks. Magentic-One uses a multi-agent architecture where a lead agent, the Orchestrator, plans, tracks progress, and re-plans to recover from errors. Throughout task execution, the Orchestrator directs other specialized agents to perform tasks as needed, such as operating a web browser, navigating local files, or writing and executing Python code. We show that Magentic-One achieves statistically competitive performance to the state-of-the-art on three diverse and challenging agentic benchmarks: GAIA, AssistantBench, and WebArena. Magentic-One achieves these results without modification to core agent capabilities or to how they collaborate, demonstrating progress towards generalist agentic systems. Moreover, Magentic-One's modular design allows agents to be added or removed from the team without additional prompt tuning or training, easing development and making it extensible to future scenarios. We provide an open-source implementation of Magentic-One, and we include AutoGenBench, a standalone tool for agentic evaluation. AutoGenBench provides built-in controls for repetition and isolation to run agentic benchmarks in a rigorous and contained manner -- which is important when agents' actions have side-effects. Magentic-One, AutoGenBench and detailed empirical performance evaluations of Magentic-One, including ablations and error analysis are available at https://aka.ms/magentic-one
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A multi-agent system based on Magentic-One did not outperform the baseline agent framework on a development set.
“We also tested the performance of a multi-agent system based on Magentic-One (Fourney et al., 2024), but found it did not outperform the baseline agent framework on a development set, see Appendix F.2.”
From RepliBench: Evaluating the autonomous replication capabilities of language model agents (2025) · cites this paper as Fourney et al., 2024
The interactions between LLM agents in MoMA remain relatively simple.
“First, the interactions between LLM agents in MoMA remain relatively simple, and enhancing communication and coordination of agents72 could further improve the model’s capabilities.”
From MoMA: a mixture-of-multimodal-agents architecture for enhancing clinical prediction modelling (2025) · cites this paper as [72]
Magentic-One uses an orchestrator to assign work and revise plans.
“Magentic-One uses an orchestrator to assign work and revise plans (Fourney et al., 2024).”
From GitSwarm: Decentralized Compounding Inference (2026) · cites this paper as Fourney et al., 2024
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The Landscape of Emerging AI Agent Architectures for Reasoning, Planning, and Tool Calling: A Survey
Masterman, T., Besen, S., Sawtell, M., & Chao, A. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.11584 · Cited by 35 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Common strategies for developing such agents [25, 62, 27, 6] include equipping LLMs with tools such as for code execution and web browsing [40, 41, 46, 29] and prompting strategies for better reasoning and planning such as CoT [58], ReACT [70] and few-shot prompting [79].”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 33
- Y. Cheng, C. Zhang, Z. Zhang, X. Meng, S. Hong, W. Li, Z. Wang, Z. Wang, F. Yin, J. Zhao, et al. Exploring large language model based intelligent agents: Definitions, meth- ods, and prospects. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.03428, 2024. · arXiv
- M. D'Arcy, T. Hope, L. Birnbaum, and D. Downey. Marg: Multi-agent review generation for scientific papers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.04259, 2024. · arXiv
- V. Dibia, A. Fourney, G. Bansal, F. Poursabzi-Sangdeh, H. Liu, and S. Amershi. Aligning offline metrics and human judgments of value for code generation models. In A. Rogers, J. Boyd-Graber, and N. Okazaki, editors, Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, pages 8516-8528, Toronto, Canada, July 2023. Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Y. Du, S. Li, A. Torralba, J. B. Tenenbaum, and I. Mordatch. Improving factuality and reasoning in language models through multiagent debate. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14325, 2023. · arXiv
- B. J. Grosz and S. Kraus. The evolution of sharedplans. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, 1999.
- T. Guo, X. Chen, Y. Wang, R. Chang, S. Pei, N. V. Chawla, O. Wiest, and X. Zhang. Large language model based multi-agents: A survey of progress and challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01680, 2024. · arXiv
- S. Hong, X. Zheng, J. Chen, Y. Cheng, C. Zhang, Z. Wang, S. K. S. Yau, Z. Lin, L. Zhou, C. Ran, et al. Metagpt: Meta programming for multi-agent collaborative framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.00352, 2023. · arXiv
- N. R. Jennings and M. Wooldridge. Applications of intelligent agents. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents, 1998.
- C. E. Jimenez, J. Yang, A. Wettig, S. Yao, K. Pei, O. Press, and K. Narasimhan. Swe- bench: Can language models resolve real-world github issues?, 2024.
- E. Li and J. Waldo. Websuite: Systematically evaluating why web agents fail. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01623, 2024. · arXiv
- N. Liu, L. Chen, X. Tian, W. Zou, K. Chen, and M. Cui. From llm to conversational agent: A memory enhanced architecture with fine-tuning of large language models. arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv-2401, 2024.
- Y. Liu, S. K. Lo, Q. Lu, L. Zhu, D. Zhao, X. Xu, S. Harrer, and J. Whittle. Agent design pattern catalogue: A collection of architectural patterns for foundation model based agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.10467, 2024. · arXiv
- C. Lu, C. Lu, R. T. Lange, J. Foerster, J. Clune, and D. Ha. The ai scientist: Towards fully automated open-ended scientific discovery. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06292, 2024. · arXiv
- G. Mialon, C. Fourrier, C. Swift, T. Wolf, Y. LeCun, and T. Scialom. Gaia: benchmark for general ai assistants. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.12983, 2023. · arXiv
- R. Nakano, J. Hilton, S. Balaji, J. Wu, L. Ouyang, C. Kim, C. Hesse, S. Jain, V. Kosaraju, W. Saunders, et al. Webgpt: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.09332, 2021. · arXiv
- B. Paranjape, S. Lundberg, S. Singh, H. Hajishirzi, L. Zettlemoyer, and M. T. Ribeiro. Art: Automatic multi-step reasoning and tool-use for large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.09014, 2023. · arXiv
- D. Paul, M. Ismayilzada, M. Peyrard, B. Borges, A. Bosselut, R. West, and B. Faltings. RE- FINER: Reasoning feedback on intermediate representations. In Y. Graham and M. Purver, editors, Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 1100-1126, St. Julian's, Malta, Mar. 2024. Association for Computational Linguistics.
- S. Reed, K. Zolna, E. Parisotto, S. G. Colmenarejo, A. Novikov, G. Barth-Maron, M. Gimenez, Y. Sulsky, J. Kay, J. T. Springenberg, et al. A generalist agent. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.06175, 2022. · arXiv
- M. Russinovich, A. Salem, and R. Eldan. Great, now write an article about that: The crescendo multi-turn llm jailbreak attack. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.01833, 2024. · arXiv
- P. Scerri, D. V. Pynadath, and M. Tambe. Adjustable autonomy in real-world multi-agent environments. In International Conference on Autonomous Agents, 2001.
- T. Shi, A. Karpathy, L. Fan, J. Hernandez, and P. Liang. World of bits: An open-domain platform for web-based agents. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2017.
- N. Shinn, F. Cassano, A. Gopinath, K. Narasimhan, and S. Yao. Reflexion: Language agents with verbal reinforcement learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024.
- P. Stone and M. Veloso. Multiagent systems: A survey from a machine learning perspective. Auton. Robots, 8(3):345-383, June 2000.
- L. Wang, C. Ma, X. Feng, Z. Zhang, H. Yang, J. Zhang, Z. Chen, J. Tang, X. Chen, Y. Lin, et al. A survey on large language model based autonomous agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.11432, 2023. · arXiv
- J. Wei, X. Wang, D. Schuurmans, M. Bosma, E. Chi, Q. Le, and D. Zhou. Chain of thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.11903, 2022. · arXiv
- M. Wooldridge and N. R. Jennings. Intelligent agents: theory and practice. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 10:115 -152, 1995.
- C. S. Xia, Y. Deng, S. Dunn, and L. Zhang. Agentless: Demystifying llm-based software engineering agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.01489, 2024. · arXiv
- J. Yang, C. E. Jimenez, A. Wettig, K. Lieret, S. Yao, K. Narasimhan, and O. Press. Swe- agent: Agent-computer interfaces enable automated software engineering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.15793, 2024. · arXiv
- J. Yang, H. Zhang, F. Li, X. Zou, C. Li, and J. Gao. Set-of-mark prompting unleashes extraordinary visual grounding in gpt-4v. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.11441, 2023. · arXiv
- S. Yao, J. Zhao, D. Yu, N. Du, I. Shafran, K. Narasimhan, and Y. Cao. React: Syner- gizing reasoning and acting in language models. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023.
- O. Yoran, S. J. Amouyal, C. Malaviya, B. Bogin, O. Press, and J. Berant. Assistantbench: Can web agents solve realistic and time-consuming tasks?, 2024.
- Y. Zhang, H. Ruan, Z. Fan, and A. Roychoudhury. Autocoderover: Autonomous program improvement. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pages 1592-1604, 2024.
- Z. J. Zhang, E. Schoop, J. Nichols, A. Mahajan, and A. Swearngin. From interaction to impact: Towards safer ai agents through understanding and evaluating ui operation impacts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.09006, 2024. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evaluation and Benchmarking of LLM Agents: A Survey
Mohammadi, M., Li, Y., Lo, J., & Yip, W. (2025) · Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining V.2 · doi:10.1145/3711896.3736570 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
“As these agents move from research prototypes to real-world applications [23, 62], the question of how to rigorously evaluate them becomes both pressing and complex.”
ADABARA, I., Olaniyi Sadiq, B., Nuhu Shuaibu, A., Ibrahim Danjuma, Y., & Maninti, V. (2025) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.169927.1 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Agentic Systems: A Guide to Transforming Industries with Vertical AI Agents
Bousetouane, F. (2025) · doi:10.32388/2dkdck · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Multi-Agent Collaboration Mechanisms: A Survey of LLMs
Tran, K.-T., Dao, D., Nguyen, M.-D., Pham, Q.-V., O'Sullivan, B., & Nguyen, H. D. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.06322 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Croxford, E., Gao, Y., First, E., Pellegrino, N., Schnier, M., Caskey, J., Oguss, M., Wills, G., Chen, G., Dligach, D., et al. (2025) · doi:10.1101/2025.04.22.25326219 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?
Cemri, M., Pan, M. Z., Yang, S., Agrawal, L. A., Chopra, B., Tiwari, R., Keutzer, K., Parameswaran, A., Klein, D., Ramchandran, K., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.13657 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“Recently, Large Language Model (LLM) based agentic systems have gained significant attention in the AI community [2–4] and multi-agent systems are increasingly explored in various domains [5–11].”
Fang, J., Peng, Y., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Yi, X., Zhang, G., Xu, Y., Wu, B., Liu, S., Li, Z., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.07407 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
LEGOMem: Modular Procedural Memory for Multi-agent LLM Systems for Workflow Automation
Han, D., Couturier, C., Madrigal Diaz, D., Zhang, X., Rühle, V., & Rajmohan, S. (2026) · Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems · doi:10.65109/vlua1303 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“In this work, we focus on a common and practical subclass of multi-agent architectures, where a central orchestrator performs planning and delegates subtasks to specialized tool-using task agents, as exemplified by the Magentic-One framework [9, 32].”
InfluentialMoMA: a mixture-of-multimodal-agents architecture for enhancing clinical prediction modelling
Gao, J., Rahman, M., Caskey, J., Oguss, M., O’Rourke, A., Brown, R., Stey, A., Mayampurath, A., Churpek, M. M., Chen, G., et al. (2025) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-025-02219-4 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Qiu, J., Qi, X., Zhang, T., Juan, X., Guo, J., Lu, Y., Wang, Y., Yao, Z., Ren, Q., Jiang, X., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.20286 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
RepliBench: Evaluating the autonomous replication capabilities of language model agents
Black, S., Stickland, A. C., Pencharz, J., Sourbut, O., Schmatz, M., Bailey, J., Matthews, O., Millwood, B., Remedios, A., & Cooney, A. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.18565
“We also tested the performance of a multi-agent system based on Magentic-One (Fourney et al., 2024), but found it did not outperform the baseline agent framework on a development set, see Appendix F.2.”
Barbaste, P., Darrigol, T., Vu, G., & Wiltberger, T. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.00006
Better Harnesses, Smaller Models: Building 90% Cheaper Agents via Automated Harness Adaptation
Yang, C., Zhao, X., Wu, T., & Kästner, C. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.08938
Raven: The Harness of Harnesses for Composable Agentic Intelligence
AI, E. (2026) · arXiv
Multi-Agent Systems Execute Arbitrary Malicious Code
Triedman, H., Jha, R., & Shmatikov, V. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.12188
GitSwarm: Decentralized Compounding Inference
Shah, V., Samanta, A., Dahal, P., Plekhanov, M., Wu, C.-J., Yih, S., Munos, R., Fergus, R., Foerster, J., Salakhutdinov, R., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2610.04862
Zhang, S., Yin, M., Zhang, J., Liu, J., Han, Z., Zhang, J., Li, B., Wang, C., Wang, H., Chen, Y., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.00212 · Cited by 1
- Authors
- Fourney, A., Bansal, G., Mozannar, H., Tan, C., Salinas, E., Erkang, Zhu, Niedtner, F., Proebsting, G., Bassman, G., Gerrits, J., Alber, J., Chang, P., Loynd, R., West, R., Dibia, V., Awadallah, A., Kamar, E., Hosn, R., & Amershi, S.
- Affiliations
- Eric
- ORCID
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2411.04468
- OpenAlex
- W4404396586
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 12
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Keywords
- multi-agent systems, agentic AI, task planning, error recovery, replanning, agent orchestration, large language models, Gaia, WebArena
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
