Benchmarking large language models for ACMG/AMP variant interpretation and variant calling
Agentic large language models are increasingly used across the genomic workflow, from variant calling to clinical interpretation, yet they are evaluated by accuracy alone, a single figure that cannot say whether a system is safe or where in the workflow a failure originates. We present ClawBench, a framework that attributes each outcome to the architectural layer that produced it across both halves of the canonical pipeline. Two design choices remove the confounds that make agentic genomics hard to evaluate: a temporally blinded truth set, in which every scored ClinVar label first became available only after the training cutoff of every model tested, and a fail-closed evidence contract that blocks evidence circular with the truth label. We score validity, safety, provenance and reproducibility, not accuracy alone, under a constraint gradient that relocates correctness from a models prior into executed, validated code. We show three things. First, dangerous misclassification is rare and model-invariant, a controlled precondition of the executed architecture rather than a frontier, while fabricated evidence is measurable and is neutralised by execution. Second, different variant classes are rate-limited by different layers: loss-of-function variants by the deterministic combiner threshold, and rare missense by evidence formation, where evidence acquisition is asymmetric and capped and strength assignment is a recoverable layer that naive strength-licensing prompts confound. Third, for variant calling the arms separate not on whether a model can plan a pipeline, which all do, but on trust properties, pinning, provenance, auditability and reproducibility, which climb monotonically toward validated execution; and a local open-weight model reproduces the safety result yet meets the structured-output and provenance contract far less often than frontier models, a conformance gap rather than a capability or safety gap. An end-to-end join attributes failures across the whole workflow, separating a missed call from a propagated genotype error from a correctly called but misinterpreted variant. ClawBench shows that apparently identical outcomes arise from distinct, independently measurable failure modes, and that trustworthiness in agentic genomics is a property of the pipeline architecture rather than of the model, providing a portable, contamination-resistant unit of attribution for the field.