Agent Bench
Email verificationProtocol 1.0.0

Three email validation APIs faced the same invalid inputs.

Codex received browser access, created the provider accounts, found the API keys, and ran four safe fixtures against Abstract, Hunter, and ZeroBounce. This report preserves the setup friction and every evaluated response.

Tested Sep 11, 2026 3 providers · 12 requests 12/12 fixture checks passed
01

All three rejected the safe invalid inputs.

There were no false-valid results. Abstract and ZeroBounce suggested the corrected Gmail domain for the typo fixture. Hunter returned disposable with score 0 and does not expose a correction field.

One shared protocol, three response contracts

A pass required the declared invalid state without a confident false-valid result. Unsupported fields were kept separate from wrong answers.

One request per fixtureSame machine and network
Abstract Email ReputationNo card required
4/4
Median latency
225 ms
False valid
0
Typo correction
Returned

Email Intelligence opened an enterprise-volume prompt before the agent continued to the free Email Reputation quickstart.

100 free requests shown
Hunter Email VerifierNo card required
4/4
Median latency
326 ms
False valid
0
Typo correction
Unsupported

Two intent screens led to an automatically provisioned API key; the copy action did not reach the automation clipboard.

50 monthly credits shown
ZeroBounce Email ValidationNo card required
4/4
Median latency
63 ms
False valid
0
Typo correction
Returned

A stale public validator URL returned 404, and an optional two-factor prompt had to be dismissed before the API panel rendered.

100 monthly credits advertised

The inputs and normalized outcomes

These addresses are malformed or use reserved and typo domains. No real mailbox was queried.

FixtureExact inputAbstractHunterZeroBounce
Invalid syntaxnot-an-emailundeliverable225 ms · HTTP 200undeliverable563 ms · HTTP 400undeliverable167 ms · HTTP 200
Invalid syntax: missing domainagentbench@undeliverable61 ms · HTTP 200undeliverable236 ms · HTTP 400undeliverable61 ms · HTTP 200
Reserved domain that cannot resolveagentbench@example.invalidundeliverable813 ms · HTTP 200undeliverable434 ms · HTTP 200undeliverable63 ms · HTTP 200
Syntactically valid address with a common domain typoagentbench@gmial.comundeliverable505 ms · HTTP 200risky326 ms · HTTP 200undeliverable69 ms · HTTP 200

What the benchmark did

The runner is an internal benchmark tool. These are the conditions needed to understand and audit the result, not installation instructions.

  1. 01
    Opened a clean provider account

    Codex had browser access and recorded signup screens, dead ends, payment requirements, and manual interruptions.

  2. 02
    Protected account credentials

    API keys stayed in an ignored local environment and were excluded from prompts, logs, artifacts, and page source.

  3. 03
    Sent the same four safe inputs

    Each provider received two malformed addresses, one reserved invalid domain, and one common domain typo from the same machine and network.

  4. 04
    Normalized each response

    Provider-specific fields were mapped to shared verdict, syntax, MX, SMTP, risk, and correction fields before evaluation.

  5. 05
    Checked the declared expectations

    A pass required the expected invalid or risky outcome without a confident false-valid result. Unsupported fields were not scored as failures.

  6. 06
    Published a sanitized record

    The public artifact retains inputs, timings, HTTP outcomes, normalized fields, and assertions while removing account and enrichment data.

Controlled accuracy testing is still pending.

This run does not establish which provider best identifies real, missing, role-based, catch-all, disposable, free-mail, alias, or null-MX addresses. Those require benchmark-owned mail infrastructure and will be published as a separate protocol update.

Submit an API for a future run