GPT-56T 861 —
MUSE-SPK 835 -0.7%
GPT-56SC 828 -5.2%
QWEN-38X 824 —
CL-OP55X 822 —
GROK-46H 822 -5%
GPT-6A 820 —
GLM-5 784 -8.4%
CL-FAB5H 743 -5.6%
KIMI-K3X 742 -8.4%
CL-OP5H 720 -5.8%
CL-OP5X 709 -18%
CL-OP46H 698 -5.9%
CL-OP47H 690 -5.9%
GEM-38FH 677 +0.1%
GEM-37FH 657 -24%
GPT-56S 622 —
CL-OP47 582 -0.7%
GPT-55H 582 —
INKL 531 —
GEM-31P 513 —
GEM-3P 499 —
CL-OP46 496 -0.2%
CL-OP48 490 —
GPT-56T 861 —
MUSE-SPK 835 -0.7%
GPT-56SC 828 -5.2%
QWEN-38X 824 —
CL-OP55X 822 —
GROK-46H 822 -5%
GPT-6A 820 —
GLM-5 784 -8.4%
CL-FAB5H 743 -5.6%
KIMI-K3X 742 -8.4%
CL-OP5H 720 -5.8%
CL-OP5X 709 -18%
CL-OP46H 698 -5.9%
CL-OP47H 690 -5.9%
GEM-38FH 677 +0.1%
GEM-37FH 657 -24%
GPT-56S 622 —
CL-OP47 582 -0.7%
GPT-55H 582 —
INKL 531 —
GEM-31P 513 —
GEM-3P 499 —
CL-OP46 496 -0.2%
CL-OP48 490 —
← Back to feed

NexAU-AHE Leads Terminal-Bench 2.0 at 84.7% — GPT-5.5 in a Better Harness Beats OpenAI's Own Agent by 2.5 Points

NexAU-AHE, submitted by china-qijizhifeng on May 14, now leads Terminal-Bench 2.0 at 84.7% ± 2.1. The agent runs GPT-5.5 — the same model powering OpenAI’s own Codex CLI, now ranked fourth at 82.2%.

The 2.5-point gap between first and fourth place, on identical model weights, is a direct measurement of what scaffold engineering delivers.

The Leaderboard

RankAgentModelOrgScore
1NexAU-AHEGPT-5.5china-qijizhifeng84.7% ± 2.1
2LemonHarnessMultipleLenovo CTO Org84.5% ± 2.6
3CapyGPT-5.5Capy83.1% ± 2.1
4Codex CLIGPT-5.5OpenAI82.2% ± 2.2
5PolarisMultiplePolarisOps82.2% ± 2.8
6WOZCODEClaude Opus 4.7WOZCODE80.2% ± 2.1
7TongAgentsGemini 3.1 ProBIGAI80.2% ± 2.6

All five top submissions were recorded on May 14, 2026 — the same date. That’s not coincidence: it reflects the benchmark community’s coordinated push to publish results before a known evaluation window closed.

What Changed Since April

OpenAI Codex CLI reached 82.0% on April 23 — the first lab-proprietary agent to top Terminal-Bench 2.0 and the first time OpenAI’s own harness led the leaderboard. Within three weeks, three external scaffolds had exceeded it. None of them changed the model.

NexAU-AHE’s 2.5-point lead over Codex CLI on GPT-5.5 specifically measures how much headroom a carefully engineered scaffold still finds in a frontier model. The gap is meaningful: it represents roughly the same magnitude as the difference between Claude Opus 4.7 (80.2%) and GPT-5.5 in a standard agent loop.

The Multi-Model Question

LemonHarness at #2 and Polaris at #5 both use multiple models, not a single frontier provider. Neither edges out the best single-model GPT-5.5 scaffolds — LemonHarness is within noise of NexAU-AHE (84.5% vs 84.7%), and Polaris sits at the same 82.2% as Codex CLI. Multi-model routing provides rough parity with strong single-model scaffolding here, not a decisive edge.

The Frontier Cluster

The confidence intervals on the top five entries all overlap at ±2-3%. Statistically, no one has broken away. But the direction is clear: the cluster is now setting up around 83-85%, with GPT-5.5 as the primary ceiling-finder and scaffold quality as the tiebreaker.

WOZCODE (Claude Opus 4.7, 80.2%) and TongAgents (Gemini 3.1 Pro, 80.2%) sit 2-4 points behind the GPT-5.5 cluster. That gap may compress when Gemini 3.5 Flash and Claude Opus 4.8 submissions arrive — neither is yet represented at rank 8 or above.

What Terminal-Bench 2.0 Measures

TB 2.0 runs agents in a real bash environment with no retrieval augmentation, no UI scaffolding, and no special context injection. A model gets a task, a shell, and a time budget. The result is one of the cleaner available measures of raw agent-level reasoning and shell tool use.

The score compression at the top — all five finalists within 2.5 points — suggests the benchmark is approaching saturation for GPT-5.5-class models under strong scaffolding. A harder revision would be needed to differentiate this tier further.