Evaluates an agentic LLM's ability to plan and execute multistep robotic manipulation tasks in simulation. It tests closed-loop reasoning via ReAct-style loops, comparing code-as-policy and tool-as-policy execution modes across linguistically diverse tasks. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ALRM Simulation Benchmark, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports task_completion.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill alrm-manipulation-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Alrm Manipulation Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-alrm-manipulation-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: alrm-manipulation-eval
description: Evaluates an agentic LLM's ability to plan and execute multistep robotic manipulation tasks in simulation. It tests closed-loop reasoning via ReAct-style loops, comparing code-as-policy and tool-as-policy execution modes across linguistically diverse tasks. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ALRM Simulation Benchmark, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports task_completion.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2601.19510
bibtex_key: gaboardidosantos2026alrm
confidence: low
---
# alrm-manipulation-eval
> ALRM: Agentic LLM for Robotic Manipulation — Gaboardi dos Santos et al. (2026) (arXiv:2601.19510, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates an agentic LLM's ability to plan and execute multistep robotic manipulation tasks in simulation. It tests closed-loop reasoning via ReAct-style loops, comparing code-as-policy and tool-as-policy execution modes across linguistically diverse tasks.
## Datasets
- **ALRM Simulation Benchmark** — total 56; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `task_completion` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Binary success metric indicating whether the LLM agent successfully fulfills the user's high-level manipulation request within the maximum step limit.
## Input / output format
**Input**: High-level natural language task descriptions or subtask templates (e.g., 'Pick the lemon and place it in the trash').
**Output**: Iterative sequences of thoughts, single-step actions (tool calls or Python code), and environmental observations until task completion or maximum steps.
## Scoring recipe
```python
```python
success = False
for step in range(max_steps):
action = model.generate_action(observation)
observation = env.execute(action)
if env.check_task_completion(observation):
success = True
break
return success
```
```
## Common pitfalls
- Simulation-to-real gap: Evaluation is conducted in Gazebo/MoveIt simulation, not on physical hardware.
- Code-as-Policy brittleness: Single syntax or logic errors in generated Python code cause immediate subtask failure.
- Step limit dependency: Performance heavily depends on the arbitrary maximum step count threshold.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The framework is evaluated on a novel benchmark of 56 linguistically diverse, multistep manipulation tasks across simulation environments, demonstrating superior performance in high-level reasoning and adaptability, with Claude-4.1-Opus and Falcon-H1-7B emerging as top performers in closed-loop and code-based execution respectively.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{gaboardidosantos2026alrm,
title={ALRM: Agentic LLM for Robotic Manipulation},
author={Gaboardi dos Santos et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2601.19510}
}
```
- arXiv: 2601.19510

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!