Abstract
Domain-specific languages (DSLs) are widely used in enterprise software, giving a compact interface to complex tasks, from data access to infrastructure automation. Platforms increasingly extend them to agents, where a developer declares the topics, permitted actions, and guardrails of an agent rather than writing general-purpose code. Large language models (LLMs) write general-purpose code well, but that ability has been measured almost entirely on languages abundant in public pretraining data, and enterprise DSLs are neither abundant nor public. We introduce AgentScript-Eval, an execution-graded benchmark of 100 real tasks for AgentScript, the declarative DSL that Salesforce uses in Agentforce to build conversational agents. Tasks span authoring an agent from a specification, debugging a broken definition, and optimizing a working one. Evaluating five models zero-shot, we find that the regime is hard: the best model reaches only 25.0% pass@3, and every model scores 0% on authoring from scratch. We further find that model scale and price are weak predictors of success -- a 31B open-weight model attains the highest compilation rate of any model tested (48.0%) and matches the strongest frontier model on partial-credit accuracy at the lowest token cost. Adding an agentic compile-and-edit loop is the single largest lever, roughly doubling partial-credit accuracy. Beyond that gain, the wording of domain guidance matters more than its packaging. The same skill pack scores 28% as plain documentation but only 14% as a live plugin. Rewriting one skill inside that plugin then raises it to 37%, our best result, with catalog and tooling untouched. Larger models did not reliably outperform smaller ones; what mattered was the harness surrounding the model and the guidance supplied to it.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.13183
