MIT and Microsoft's 'Murakkab' cuts the cost and energy of running AI agents
Researchers from MIT and Microsoft Azure detailed Murakkab, a system that lets developers describe agentic workflows in plain language and then automatically picks the models, tools, and hardware to run them — using roughly a third of the compute and a quarter of the energy and cost of conventional approaches in tests.
Researchers from MIT and Microsoft Azure have detailed Murakkab, a system designed to make agentic AI workflows dramatically cheaper and less energy-hungry to run. Described in an MIT News writeup on June 25, the work targets a problem that has grown alongside the agent boom: the elaborate, multi-model pipelines behind modern agents are expensive and wasteful, partly because developers hand-wire which models, tools, and hardware each step uses and rarely revisit those choices.
Describe the goal, not the plumbing
Murakkab's central idea is to let a developer describe what an agentic application should accomplish in plain language, rather than specifying how the components fit together. The system then automatically selects the best available models and tools, decides which steps can run in parallel versus in sequence, and maps the workload onto hardware — continuously reconfiguring at runtime to honor the developer's stated priorities, whether that is minimizing cost, maximizing speed, or reducing energy use.
A profile-guided optimizer and an adaptive runtime jointly manage that full stack, a kind of cross-layer optimization the researchers say existing agent frameworks and cloud schedulers cannot do on their own because each only sees part of the picture.
The efficiency numbers
In the team's tests, the gains were substantial. Murakkab completed comparable work using about 35 percent of the compute, roughly 27 percent of the energy, and around 25 percent of the cost of more conventional approaches. In one case the system achieved better than an order-of-magnitude reduction in energy with only about a 2 percent drop in accuracy — the kind of trade-off that becomes attractive at scale.
The project is credited to MIT's Gohar Chaudhry and associate professor Adam Belay, working with Microsoft Azure technical fellow Ricardo Bianchini and collaborators, and is slated for presentation at the USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI).
The timing is notable. As enterprises move agents from pilots into production, the recurring bill for inference — not the one-time cost of building an agent — is becoming the dominant expense, and data-center energy draw is under growing scrutiny. Work like Murakkab reframes agent reliability and economics as a systems problem, suggesting much of the waste in today's agent stacks comes not from the models themselves but from how clumsily they are wired together.
Sources
AI-assisted reporting, overseen by the AgentsAI team. Spotted an error? Let us know.
More ai news
OpenAI Takes GPT-5.6 Public After Weeks of US Government-Gated Access
OpenAI opened GPT-5.6's Sol, Terra, and Luna models to the general public on July 9, after the Commerce Department's CAISI cleared a wider release that had been restricted to government-approved customers since late June.
Meta Ships Muse Spark 1.1, Undercutting OpenAI and Anthropic on API Pricing
Meta Superintelligence Labs released Muse Spark 1.1, a multimodal agentic model with a self-managed 1-million-token context window, alongside a new public Meta Model API priced at $1.25/$4.25 per million tokens — well below OpenAI's and Anthropic's comparable rates.
SpaceXAI Launches Grok 4.5, Undercutting Rivals on Coding-Agent Pricing
SpaceXAI, the renamed xAI-SpaceX combination, released Grok 4.5 on July 8 at $2/$6 per million input/output tokens — well below Claude Opus 4.8 and roughly matching GPT-5.6 Luna — positioning it for coding and agentic workloads via Cursor and the API.
OpenAI Retracts Its Own Coding Benchmark Recommendation After Finding 30% of Tasks Broken
OpenAI audited SWE-Bench Pro, a benchmark it had previously recommended as a coding-capability measure, and found roughly 30% of its tasks are flawed — prompting the company to retract its endorsement just months after pushing the field to adopt it.