Paper detail

MobileWorld: Benchmarking Autonomous Mobile Agents in Agent-User Interactive and MCP-Augmented Environments

Among existing online mobile-use benchmarks, AndroidWorld has emerged as the dominant benchmark due to its reproducible environment and deterministic evaluation; however, recent agents achieving over 90% success rates indicate its saturation and motivate the need for a more challenging benchmark. In addition, its environment lacks key application categories, such as e-commerce and enterprise communication, and does not reflect realistic mobile-use scenarios characterized by vague user instructions and hybrid tool usage. We introduce MobileWorld, a substantially more challenging benchmark designed to reflect real-world usage through 201 tasks across 20 applications. MobileWorld derives its difficulty from an emphasis on long-horizon, cross-application workflows, requiring nearly twice as many completion steps on average (27.8 vs. 14.3) and featuring a significantly higher proportion of multi-app tasks (62.2% vs. 9.5%) than AndroidWorld. To overcome the limitations of existing environments, MobileWorld achieves a balance between production-grade utility and reproducible evaluation by utilizing open-source alternatives to industry standards (e.g., Mattermost for Slack). This approach enables a fully observable and controlled environment through source code modification and direct backend database access for precise verification. MobileWorld also introduces novel task categories, including agent-user interaction and Model Context Protocol (MCP)-augmented tasks, for evaluating agents in user-aware, hybrid-tool scenarios. To facilitate evaluation, we develop a planner-executor agentic framework with extended action spaces to support user interactions and MCP calls. Our results reveal a sharp performance drop compared to AndroidWorld, with the best agentic framework and end-to-end model achieving 51.7% and 20.9% success rates, respectively, highlighting ample headroom for future research.

preprint2025arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.