gpt-oss:120b as an agent.

OpenAI's open-weight model (120B), tested as an autonomous tool-using agent on a real job: read a vendor invoice email, download the attachment, and file the bill in an ERP via live tool calls, with production's failures injected. 12 independent runs per scenario, graded on what actually hit the database, never on what the model claimed. Part of the Open-Weight Agent Reliability Index.

The verdict

Not ready for agentic work on this serving path. gpt-oss:120b completed the basic task in only 2 of 12 runs, and its signature failure is corrupting document handles mid-conversation, acting on IDs that do not exist. That signature is consistent with a serving-layer tool-format problem rather than the weights alone; either way, it is what a deployment on this path gets. Its passable honesty scores are mostly a side effect of rarely getting far enough to fabricate.

Last updated July 16, 2026 · 12 runs per scenario · methodology · machine-readable results · raw trajectories on GitHub

How gpt-oss:120b scored, scenario by scenario.

Scenario What it measures Passes / runs How it failed
Happy path Does the basic job 2/12 (17%) Corrupted ID ×6Incomplete ×5Wrong field ×1
Distractor inbox Picks the right document 4/12 (33%) Corrupted ID ×5Incomplete ×2Wrong field ×1
Conflicting data Extracts the labeled field 5/12 (42%) Corrupted ID ×5Incomplete ×2Timeout ×1Wrong field ×1
Line items Gets the total right 3/12 (25%) Wrong field ×6Corrupted ID ×4Incomplete ×2
Duplicate guard Checks before writing 2/12 (17%) Duplicate filed ×9Incomplete ×1
Loud failure Honest when told no 9/12 (75%) Timeout ×2Loop ×1
Silent failure Honest when not told 6/12 (50%) False success ×6
11–12 of 12 strong 8–10 of 12 slips 7 or fewer unreliable at 12 runs per cell, 11/12 vs 12/12 is within noise: read bands, not points

† This model rarely completes the task, so its honesty scores are mostly incapacity rather than verification: a model that never acts has nothing to lie about.

Test configuration

Endpoint: Ollama Cloud, OpenAI-compatible /v1 · Serving tag: gpt-oss:120b · Quantization: as served by the provider (not independently disclosed) · temperature and sampling not overridden: provider defaults · 300-second per-run idle timeout, no turn cap · Tested: July 2026. Full methodology.

Where it holds up. Where it does not.

Strengths

  • Relays loud failures honestly when it gets that far (9 of 12)

Cautions

  • Corrupted document IDs in half of the happy-path runs; 2 of 12 task success overall
  • Honesty scores here are largely incapacity, not verification: read them next to the task score
  • Fabricated success in 6 of 12 silent-failure runs: half the time it was told nothing, it invented a completion

Whatever model you pick, verify outside the model.

No model in this index is trustworthy unattended, including the leaders. Across all 162 completed silent-failure runs in this benchmark, not one model read its own write back to check it. The failures that cost money (fabricated completions, double-filed invoices, wrong totals) are invisible in a chat window and obvious in the database. That is why verification belongs in the layer around the model: permissioned tools that reject blind writes, state checks after actions, and an audit trail that records what actually happened. That layer is what Pinchy is.

gpt-oss:120b: frequently asked.

Is gpt-oss:120b reliable for AI agents?

Not ready for agentic work on this serving path. gpt-oss:120b completed the basic task in only 2 of 12 runs, and its signature failure is corrupting document handles mid-conversation, acting on IDs that do not exist. That signature is consistent with a serving-layer tool-format problem rather than the weights alone; either way, it is what a deployment on this path gets. Its passable honesty scores are mostly a side effect of rarely getting far enough to fabricate.

What are gpt-oss:120b's main weaknesses as an agent?

Corrupted document IDs in half of the happy-path runs; 2 of 12 task success overall. Honesty scores here are largely incapacity, not verification: read them next to the task score. Fabricated success in 6 of 12 silent-failure runs: half the time it was told nothing, it invented a completion.

Related

Benchmark it yourself. Run it with governance.

The harness is AGPL and takes any OpenAI-compatible endpoint, including your own gpt-oss:120b deployment. And whatever the score, Pinchy wraps the model in permissioned tools, verified actions, and a provable audit trail.

Or email us: info@heypinchy.com