AgentMercury: Your Agent Can Synthesize Verifiable Environments for Business Scenarios at scale

arXiv:2608.206342026-08-24

An AI system builds whole business worlds instead of single tasks, so training grounds can scale on their own

AgentMercury builds a persistent, executable 'world'—complete with services, state, and cross-service rules—straight from a high-level business scenario, rather than hand-crafting an environment for one specific task, and lets diverse tasks emerge from that world afterward. Reinforcement learning on 4,783 such synthesized environments improved performance not only on enterprise workflows but also on unrelated benchmarks like reasoning and coding, even though those benchmarks were never targeted during environment construction. The paper also shows that the world-building process itself can be turned into a learnable skill.

METAL LAB explanatory visual

From Business Scenario to Training Signal: How AgentMercury Works

Evidence statusMeasured results reported

Business scenario σA high-level description of an industry and country context fed as input
Planet: world constructionBuilds an executable world w with a service graph, state schema, seeded initial state, and cross-service invariants
Task instantiationDifferent task-specific state seedings and rubrics generate diverse tasks u from the same world
Policy-environment interactionThe policy calls tools, transitions the state, and receives observations in a repeated loop
Deterministic grading and RLSQL-based checks against task rubrics and world invariants compute rewards used to update the policy via GRPO/SAO

An explanatory diagram made by METAL LAB, not a figure supplied by the paper's authors.

What they did

The paper addresses the problem that existing agent training environments are usually built around specific predefined tasks or benchmarks, making it hard to scale environments that reflect realistic, evolving business workflows.
AgentMercury introduces a 'Planet' role that first turns a business scenario σ into a fully executable world w—complete with company identity, service graph, state schema, seeded initial state, and world-level invariants—before any particular task is defined; tasks are then instantiated afterward from that same world.
The framework produced 4,783 executable environments spanning 14 industries and 50 countries, used as training substrates to reinforcement-learn a Qwen3.5-4B policy with GRPO, drawing on a corpus of 43,300 synthesized tasks.
The team also fine-tuned Qwen3.5-35B-A3B on 29,823 construction-trace samples (records of how worlds were built) so the model could learn to author new executable worlds from unseen business briefs.
Success in the authoring experiments was judged strictly: a generated world counted as successful only if it passed all 12 structural validators (the 'oracle').

Figure 1: AgentMercury synthesizes diverse, scalable, and verifiable business environments at scale. (a) The synthesized environment spans 14 industries and 50 countries, covering 4,783 environments with anonymized to prevent hallucination. (b) Comparison of environment scale and multi-service depth with existing agent environments (Trivedi et al., 2024; Wu et al., 2026; Shi et al., 2026; Dong et al., 2026); AgentMercury occupies the regime that is both large-scale and multi-service. (c) Each environment contains rich, stateful structure, including multiple services, tools, state tables, and deterministic SQL-based verifiers that enforce cross-service constraints.

Table 1: Result on EnterpriseOps-Gym (Malay et al., 2026). We evaluate whether training on environments and tasks synthesized by AgentMercury improves agent performance across model scales and policy optimization methods. Results are reported for both Qwen3.5-4B and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B models, with GRPO (Shao et al., 2024) and SAO (Hou et al., 2026) considered as alternative RL algorithms. † signifies that the result are derived from EnterpriseOps-Gym.
Model	Teams	CSM	Email	ITSM	Calendar	HR	Drive	Hybrid	Avg.
GPT-5 †	26.3	36.4	49.0	18.9	41.3	17.9	34.0	23.5	30.9
Gemini-2.5-Pro †	39.3	11.6	31.1	13.9	12.5	4.9	27.0	19.6	19.9
Kimi-K2-Thinking †	30.0	7.1	51.0	12.2	15.4	8.2	39.6	15.7	22.4
Qwen3-4B (Think) †	24.0	3.8	38.4	5.6	5.8	7.1	21.9	15.8	15.3
Qwen3-30B (Think) †	22.0	5.4	51.9	6.7	18.3	7.6	25.7	15.7	19.1
Qwen3-235B (Think) †	28.0	4.7	38.1	9.3	15.7	7.8	23.8	17.7	18.1
Qwen3.5-4B	20.8±2.5	9.2±2.3	23.9±3.0	6.8±1.0	10.4±2.5	9.5±2.8	6.2±1.6	11.7±1.7	12.3±0.2
Qwen3.5-4B + GRPO + Ours	23.0±1.6	5.6±1.5	33.3±0.9	7.4±1.1	13.1±1.6	10.8±4.3	15.6±3.1	17.0±1.1	15.7±0.6
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B	33.9±3.8	7.6±2.5	53.2±2.3	14.6±1.0	18.6±0.9	11.4±1.5	35.9±5.4	23.5±1.7	24.8±0.6
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B + GRPO + Ours	39.8±4.1	11.1±0.9	53.8±7.5	15.6±1.6	21.9±1.9	17.7±0.9	41.2±3.9	23.7±1.1	28.1±1.4
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B + SAO + Ours	39.1±2.3	12.5±2.8	54.8±2.1	16.5±0.5	22.6±0.5	17.7±1.4	39.1±4.4	24.1±2.4	28.3±1.5

Figure 2: From scenario-grounded world construction to agent interaction. (A) Planet transforms a high-level business scenario σ into an executable world w, constructing its company identity, service graph, state schema, seeded initial state s0, and world-level invariants ℛ. A task is then instantiated from the resulting world through task-specific state seeding and a rubric. (B) Within the constructed world, a policy acts from the interaction history, producing actions that deterministically transition the environment from st to st+1, while observations ωt+1 are exposed through the observation interface. The resulting trajectory is evaluated post-episode using the task rubric and, where applicable, the world-level invariants. The formulation thus separates world construction, task instantiation, interaction, and evaluation.

Table 2: Out-of-domain evaluation across mathematical reasoning, coding, scientific computing, tool use, and agentic benchmarks. We report mean ± standard deviation over three independent evaluation runs (N=3). Qwen3.5-4B and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B are evaluated before and after RL training on tasks synthesized by AgentMercury.
Model	AIME26	HMMT	LCB	SciCode	Tau3- Airline	Tau3-	Airline	Tau3- Retail	Tau3-
Tau3-
Airline
Tau3-
Retail
Tau3-
Telecom
GPQA-
Diamond
Qwen3.5-4B	45.9±1.7	28.5±1.2	36.6±2.8	22.6±0.1	48.8±2.1	70.4±1.0	92.5±1.0	30.3±1.8	76.5±0.7
Qwen3.5-4B + GRPO + Ours	56.0±1.8	35.4±1.6	44.0±1.2	25.7±0.7	58.7±0.8	73.6±1.3	91.9±1.3	31.7±1.5	77.5±0.6
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B	91.0±0.3	77.0±0.9	74.3±2.2	29.7±1.5	39.1±10.6	52.7±22.1	49.1±49.8	31.1±1.3	82.8 ±3.0
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B + GRPO + Ours	91.9±2.1	80.0±0.7	79.0±0.5	29.9±1.7	52.5±5.2	57.1±8.3	68.9±20.5	42.5±0.3	85.0±0.5
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B + SAO + Ours	92.2±1.9	83.3±3.1	78.6±1.0	28.3±1.9	50.9±8.1	55.7±10.2	65.5±23.8	42.1±0.1	84.0±1.0

Figure 3: Out-of-domain benchmark performance across training checkpoints for Qwen3.5-4B + GRPO + Ours. The dashed line denotes the base-model performance, while error bars show the standard deviation over three independent evaluation runs. The gradual improvement across heterogeneous benchmarks indicates that the policy learned from AgentMercury environments acquires transferable capabilities beyond the training environments.

Table 3: Authoring executable worlds from high-level business briefs. We report oracle-pass rates over 30 held-out briefs. A world is counted as successful only when it passes all 12 structural validators. Zero-shot provides only the business brief, while Recipe additionally provides an invariant digest and a trimmed construction exemplar.
Model	Zero-shot	Recipe
Claude Opus 4.8	83.3%	80.0%
GPT-5.4	66.7%	66.7%
DeepSeek-V4-Pro	83.3%	86.7%
GLM-5.2	80.0%	76.7%
Mean (API models)	78.3%	77.5%
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B	3.3%	20.0%
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B + AgentMercury	83.3%	10.0%

Figure 4: Training dynamics of Qwen3.5-4B + GRPO + Ours. We report the raw reward, response length, truncated-response ratio, and degenerate-response ratio over training steps. The increasing reward together with decreasing truncation and near-zero degeneration indicates that policy improvement is not accompanied by substantial response collapse or pathological generation.

Table 4: Composition of the synthesized task corpus used for RL. Statistics are computed over all 43,300 tasks.
Statistic	Value
Tasks	43,300
Executable worlds / companies	4,326
Task seeds per world	10
Unique industries	2,287
Unique tools	842
Unique state tables	222
Service combinations	148
Tools per world	10–26 (16.1 avg.)
Services per task	1–5 (2.9 avg.)
Assertions per task	2–10 (5.4 avg.)

Figure 5: Overview of the synthesized environments, sampled training footprint, and task lifecycle in AgentMercury. (A) The full corpus contains 43,300 investigation tasks instantiated from 4,326 synthetic company environments, spanning 2,287 industries, 842 tools, 222 state tables, and 148 service combinations. (B) Across 200 RL training steps, the agent observes 3,200 tasks (7.4% of the full task corpus) while retaining broad coverage of environments, industries, tools, state tables, and service combinations through shuffled sampling. (C) Each training instance follows a structured lifecycle from a high-level business scenario to executable world construction, task instantiation, multi-step tool interaction, deterministic post-episode verification, and reward-based policy optimization. The resulting framework separates world construction from task sampling, allowing a single synthesized environment to support multiple seeded tasks while providing verifiable learning signals for agent training.

Table 5: Coverage of the tasks that received gradients during the reported RL run relative to the full synthesized corpus. These statistics used only for GRPO algorithm.
Statistic	Full	Trained	Coverage
Tasks	43,300	3,200	7.4%
Environments	4,326	2,313	53.5%
Industries	2,287	1,438	62.9%
Tools	842	638	75.8%
State tables	222	137	61.7%
Service combinations	148	93	62.8%

Figure 6: Structural analysis of the synthesized task space. (a) A t-SNE projection of task descriptions based on TF-IDF features shows substantial textual clustering, but the clusters do not correspond to meaningful task metadata such as domain, persona, or task shape. (b) In contrast, projecting the same tasks using their exposed tool sets reveals clear domain-specific structure, indicating that the primary source of task variation lies in the executable tool surface rather than in task language. (c) Distribution of nearest-neighbor cosine similarity in the TF-IDF space, showing that although the overall task space is broad, most tasks still have a highly similar counterpart. (d) The number of exposed tools takes only five values, {10,14,18,22,26}, revealing a discrete task-shape lattice induced by the core tool set and the number of additional resources.

Table 6: Model-parallelism and memory configuration used for Qwen3.5-4B policy optimization.
Parameter	Value
Tensor parallelism	2
Pipeline / context / expert parallelism	1 / 1 / 1
Sequence parallelism	Enabled
Recomputation	Full, uniform, 1 layer
Attention backend	FlashAttention
Attention softmax precision	FP32
Dropout	0
Max tokens per GPU	24,576

Figure 7: Training dynamics of Qwen3.5-35B-A3B with GRPO and AgentMercury. We report the raw reward, response length, truncated-response ratio, and degenerate-response ratio throughout training. The increasing reward is accompanied by a steady reduction in truncation, while degenerate responses remain negligible.

Table 7: Rollout and fully-asynchronous execution configuration.
Parameter	Value
Max response length	16,384
SGLang context length	24,576
Rollout temperature	1.0
End-of-turn token	<\|im_end\|>
Partial rollout	Enabled
Reasoning / tool parser	Qwen3 / Qwen3-Coder
SGLang memory fraction	0.8
Max running requests	64
Fully asynchronous training	Enabled
Actor / rollout GPUs	2 / 6
Max staleness	4
Rollout in-flight cap	64
Minimum fresh-token ratio	0.75
Weight update interval	1
Fault tolerance	Enabled

Figure 8: Training dynamics of Qwen3.5-35B-A3B with SAO and AgentMercury. We report the raw reward, response length, truncated-response ratio, and degenerate-response ratio throughout training. SAO exhibits a sustained reward increase together with a substantial reduction in truncation, while degenerate responses remain close to zero.

Table 8: Configuration of the executable MCP environments used during policy optimization.
Parameter	Value
Maximum MCP turns	20
Maximum generation tokens / turn	8,192
Arena backend	Local (in-process)
Probe tool	Calendar
Environment creation throttle	8
Ready timeout	600 s
Reset timeout	180 s

Table 9: Reward and verification configuration used during RL training.
Parameter	Value
Reward implementation	AgentMercury rl_reward.py
Reward aggregator	Fraction
Behavior penalty	Enabled
Reward judge	DeepSeek-V4-Flash
Judge temperature	0.0
Judge max tokens	4,000
Truncated-sample handling	Retained during cold start

Table 10: GRPO and optimizer configuration for Qwen3.5-4B.
Parameter	Value
Advantage estimator	GRPO
Surrogate	Decoupled-PPO (icepop)
ϵ-clip / ϵ-clip-high	0.20 / 0.28
Entropy coefficient	0
GRPO std normalization	Disabled
Per-token loss	Enabled
Global batch size	128
Rollout batch size	16
Samples per prompt	8
Dynamic sampling filter	Zero-std reward groups dropped
Optimizer	Adam
β1 / β2	0.9 / 0.98
Learning rate	1×10−6
Learning-rate schedule	Constant
Warmup	0
Weight decay	0
Gradient accumulation	FP32

Table 11: Model and corpus configuration for the Qwen3.5-4B RL experiment.
Parameter	Value
Base model	Qwen3.5-4B
Training corpus	AgentMercury investigation corpus
Number of tasks	43,300
Seeds per environment	10

Findings

Training Qwen3.5-4B with GRPO on AgentMercury environments raised the EnterpriseOps-GYM average score from 12.3 to 15.7 (+27.6%), and also raised the out-of-domain AIME26 score, which was never targeted during training, from 45.9 to 56.0.
On EnterpriseOps-Gym subdomains, Drive rose from 6.2 to 15.6 and Email from 23.9 to 33.3; 7 of 8 domains improved, while CSM dropped from 9.2 to 5.6.
For Qwen3.5-35B-A3B, GRPO raised the average score from 24.8 to 28.1 (+13.3%) and SAO raised it from 24.8 to 28.3 (+14.1%), with both algorithms improving all eight enterprise domains.
Before fine-tuning, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B passed the world-authoring oracle on only 3.3% of 30 held-out business briefs; after fine-tuning on construction traces, this rose to 83.3% (Fisher exact test p=1.2x10^-10), with the average number of passed validators rising to 11.5 out of 12.
Comparing zero-shot vs. recipe (extra construction guidance) prompting, five off-the-shelf API models showed little difference (80.7% vs. 78.0% average pass rate), but for the fine-tuned model, adding the recipe sharply hurt performance, dropping the pass rate from 83.3% to 10.0%.

Where it can be used

Generating large numbers of scenario-grounded environments to train enterprise-automation agents (email, calendar, HR, ITSM, and similar workflows)
Situations needing reinforcement-learning training data that reflects broad realistic business workflows rather than data tailored to a specific benchmark
Building pipelines where a model authors executable worlds itself instead of requiring humans to hand-design each environment
Constructing agent evaluation setups that check whether cross-service rules (e.g., across inventory, shipping, and billing) are respected

Limits and open work

Not every business domain benefited from training—CSM performance actually declined after training, so gains are not uniformly positive across all enterprise workflows.
The world-authoring fine-tuning results are based on only 30 held-out business briefs, so generalization to a wider range of industries and countries is not yet demonstrated.
Recipe-based prompting did not reliably improve zero-shot API models and substantially hurt the fine-tuned model, and the underlying cause of this asymmetry is not fully explained.
Even strong models such as GPT-5.4 still misplace cross-service invariants in about a third of held-out briefs (10 of 30), showing this remains a persistent structural weak point.
The work does not train a separate learned world model and instead uses the executable environment directly as the transition function, so combining this approach with a learned world model remains untested.

Why it matters

If training environments can be generated at scale directly from business scenarios rather than hand-built task by task, teams building agentic systems could obtain far more diverse, realistic training grounds much faster. The finding that world-construction itself can be learned also hints at reducing the bottleneck of humans having to design every environment by hand.

Terms in this paper

Planet · The AgentMercury role that turns a business scenario into an executable world containing services, state, and rules
world-level invariant · A cross-service rule the world is supposed to satisfy, checked after the fact rather than enforced automatically during interaction
GRPO / SAO · Two reinforcement-learning algorithms used to train the policy model (group relative policy optimization / single-rollout asynchronous optimization)
oracle-pass rate · A strict success metric requiring a generated environment to pass all 12 structural validators to count as successfully constructed
construction trace · Recorded intermediate steps of how a scenario is turned into an executable world, used as supervision data for training a model to author worlds

Original abstract (English)

Agents learn to act through interaction with environments, yet the environments used for training are often manually constructed or synthesized around predefined tasks and benchmarks. This task-centric paradigm makes it difficult to scale environments that reflect realistic and evolving workflows where diverse tasks can naturally emerge from the underlying world. We introduce AgentMercury, a scalable framework for synthesizing executable environments from high-level business scenarios. Rather than constructing an environment for a specific task, AgentMercury first instantiates a persistent world with entities, services, tools, state, and executable cross-service invariants, from which diverse tasks and interaction trajectories can subsequently emerge. We construct 4,783 executable environments spanning 14 industries and 50 countries, and use them as training substrates for reinforcement learning. Despite being generated without targeting the evaluation benchmarks, policies trained on these business-oriented environments improve substantially on both enterprise workflows and out-of-domain benchmarks spanning reasoning, coding, scientific computing, and tool use. In our experiments, Qwen3.5-4B improves from 12.3 to 15.7 on EnterpriseOps-GYM and from 45.9 to 56.0 on AIME26 after training on AgentMercury environments. We further show that the construction process itself can be learned: fine-tuning Qwen3.5-35B-A3B on construction traces increases executable-world authoring success from 3.3% to 83.3% on held-out business scenarios. These results show that scenario-grounded environments can provide useful and generalizable learning signals beyond benchmark-specific training, while their construction can itself become a learnable capability.

Authors · Minbyul Jeong, Chanwoong Yoon

Read on arXiv

Latest papers

All papers →

Latest from METAL LAB

Figures: Minbyul Jeong et al., arXiv:2608.20634, CC BY-SA 4.0