AIEvals

Benchmarks

Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark

Multi-step legal agent work: retrieval, document review and drafting under a rubric rather than a single answer.

Professional knowledgeHarvey and Vals AI73 models run by Vals AIUpdated 30 September 2026Reported by Z.ai, Google DeepMind

How it is run

Vals reports a criteria pass rate alongside the headline score.

What it cannot tell you

The headline numbers are low for every model, which reflects both task difficulty and strict rubric scoring. Do not compare these percentages directly with LegalBench.

Leader
Muse Spark 1.225.42% · Vals AI's own list
Top-ten spread
14.17%Leader minus tenth place, or last place in smaller fields.
Median
3.33%of the 73 rows published
No published result
9of 46 models on this site

Independent leaderboard · Vals AI

Top 73 of 73 runs by Vals AI, one harness.

#ModelScore
1Muse Spark 1.225.42%
2Muse Spark 1.3 Max23.75%
3Muse Spark 1 322.92%
4Muse Spark 1 120.00%
5Gemini 4 Argon19.58%
6Grok 4.615.83%
7Grok 4.512.92%
8Grok 4.712.50%
9MiMo-V2.6-Flash11.25%
9Qwen3.8 27b11.25%
9Claude Fable 511.25%
12MiMo V2.6 Pro10.83%
12Kimi K310.83%
14Qwen3.8 Max10.42%
15Gemini 3.8 Flash10.00%
16Claude Opus 4.89.58%
17Hunyuan Hy4 Preview9.17%
17Ember 19.17%
19Gemini 3.7 Flash8.75%
20Deepseek V4 Flash 07318.33%
20GLM 5.38.33%
22DeepSeek V4 Pro7.50%
23Glm 5.27.08%
24DeepSeek V4.1 Flash6.67%
24Claude Opus 4.76.67%
24GLM 5.3 Flash6.67%
24Claude Opus 56.67%
24Claude Fable 5.16.67%
29GPT-6 Astra5.42%
29GPT-6.1 Sol5.42%
31Claude Sonnet 4 65.00%
31Claude Sonnet 55.00%
33MiniMax M34.17%
34Deepseek V4 Pro3.75%
34GPT-5.53.75%
34Claude Opus 5.53.75%
37Gemini 3.6 Flash3.33%
38GPT-6 Luna2.92%
38Claude Sonnet 5.52.92%
40Gemini 3.5 Flash2.50%
40GPT-5.6 Sol2.50%
42Mimo V2.5 Pro2.08%
42Inkling2.08%
44Mimo V2.51.67%
44GPT-6 Sol1.67%
44Kimi K2.61.67%
44Inkling Small1.67%
44Qwen3.7 Max1.67%
49Ling 3.0 Flash 26071.25%
49GPT-5.6 Luna1.25%
49Qwen3.6 Plus1.25%
52Claude Haiku 4 5 20251001 Thinking0.83%
52GPT-5.6 Terra0.83%
54Grok 4.30.42%
54Nemotron 3 Ultra 550b A55b0.42%
54Mistral Medium 3.50.42%
57Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Preview0.00%
57Mercury 2.50.00%
57Gemini 3 Flash Preview0.00%
57Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite0.00%
57Ling 3.0 Flash Af Rc30.00%
57Gpt 5.4 Nano 2026 03 170.00%
57Gemini 3.1 Pro0.00%
57MiniMax M2.70.00%
57Laguna M.10.00%
57Glm 5.10.00%
57Grok 4.20 0309 Reasoning0.00%
57Qwen3.7 Plus0.00%
57Gpt 5.4 Mini 2026 03 170.00%
57Gpt 5.4 2026 03 050.00%
57Laguna Xs.20.00%
57Kimi K2.5 Thinking0.00%
57Nemotron Lightning 3p5 30b A3b0.00%

No published result tracked

9 of the 46 models on this site have no published number on this benchmark, so their cells in the home table stay blank rather than reading as zero.

Read this with

Benchmarks in the same category, which usually disagree with this one on purpose.

As reported by each publisher

The same benchmark, measured by the labs themselves. Compare down a column, never across two publishers.

Z.ai

GLM-Legal: legal benchmark evaluation · 12 October 2026

RankModelScore
1GLM-Legal19.2%
4GLM-5.3-Flash6.7%
2Kimi K312.9%
3Claude Fable 511.3%
5GPT-6 Astra5.4%

Ranks compare reported scores in the same published row; ties share a rank.

Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark. All-pass rate across 24 practice areas; GLM-Legal improves on GLM-5.3-Flash by 12.5 percentage points.

Z.ai’s three-row comparison image, read 13 October 2026. All 15 values retain the published model identities; GLM-5.3-Flash is a comparison column, not GLM 5.3. Harvey LAB is the all-pass rate across 24 practice areas, distinct from criteria pass rate. LegalBench and PLawBench retain the percentages shown in the image; their aggregation, task subsets and judge settings are not specified. Reasoning effort, harness configuration and trial counts are not stated. These are publisher reports, kept separate from independent Vals and Artificial Analysis results. Ranks are derived only within each row, with ties sharing a rank.

z.ai/blog/glm-legal

Google DeepMind

Gemini 4 Argon: model evaluation · October 2026

Ranks compare reported scores in the same published row; ties share a rank.

Page 5 of Google DeepMind’s model evaluation, read 1 October 2026. Gemini runs use the API at the highest thinking setting, generally pass@1 without majority voting or parallel test-time compute; smaller benchmarks average multiple trials. Other models use their highest available published reasoning results. Google quotes Vals AI for knowledge-work and Vibe Code results, Zapier’s private-set AutomationBench leaderboard, Proximal for FrontierSWE v2, Surge AI for RiemannBench and no-tools Chartography, and the CWE-bench v1 leaderboard. Argon’s DeepSWE uses mini-swe; Terminal-Bench 4.0 is self-computed for Argon and quoted from the author board for other models. PostTrainBench v1.1 uses OpenCode with one H100 and a 10-hour budget for all models. Terminal-Bench Science uses a 6x verifier timeout for Argon. LABBench 2 uses terminal, bioinformatics tools, Python, R and internet access for all models. GraphWalks uses BFS F1 on two separate subsets: 650 items up to 128k tokens and 200 items from 256k to 1M. Agent’s Last Exam uses ALE-Claw, a 5-hour window and binary pass rate, with safety filters enabled for Argon. OSWorld 2.0 uses offline partial reward, the best of three single-attempt runs for Argon, safety filters, 1080p, 500 steps, Gemini CUA with parallel batch tools and compaction, screenshot-only observation and the 08.08 patch; Claude’s combined online/offline results are omitted. LVBench runs without tools, using 1 FPS for Gemini, 800 frames for Astra, 300 for Fable and 600 for Opus. Missing cells remain blank. These are the report’s published figures, preserved separately from this site’s independent source snapshots.

storage.googleapis.com/deepmind-media/gemini/gemini_4_argon_model_evaluation.pdf

Sources

Every page used for this benchmark, read on 17 October 2026.