arXiv Computation and Language
LLM Agents Already Know When to Call Tools -- Even Without Reasoning
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Oct 26
Model-Adaptive Tool Necessity Reveals the Knowing-Doing Gap in LLM Tool Use
The paper introduces a model‑adaptive definition of tool necessity that accounts for each LLM’s empirical performance, contrasting it with observed tool‑call behavior across four models on arithmetic and factual QA datasets. It finds substantial mismatches—26.5‑54.0% for arithmetic and 30.8‑41.8% for factual QA—between when tools are needed and when they are actually used. By probing hidden states, the authors show that the main source of mismatch lies in the transition from internal cognition (recognizing tool necessity) to action (making a tool call), revealing a knowing‑doing gap in LLM tool use.
arXiv AI
Jul 14
AgentAbstain: Do LLM Agents Know When Not to Act?
arXiv:2607. 10059v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent systems based on large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed for autonomous tasks, yet existing evaluations mostly focus on task success rather than whether agents know when to abstain.
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 16
Spurious Tool Use: When RL Agents Learn the Wrong Reason to Act
The paper investigates how reinforcement learning can cause large language model agents to adopt shortcut policies for tool use, relying on superficial prompt cues rather than actual task needs. By creating synthetic environments that mix factual QA and math reasoning, the authors show that agents often invoke tools when cues are present, even when those tools are unnecessary, with spurious invocation rates rising up to 39%. They find that shortcut learning occurs mainly when agents have already mastered the target tool and that semantic alignment between cues and tools amplifies the effect. To counter this, they propose a dense, decision-level reward where an LLM judge assesses tool necessity, which reduces cue-driven tool use while maintaining performance.
arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 8
How Do Agentic LLMs Decide to Call Tools? A Tool-Call Vector Shaped by Suppression
arXiv:2610.09624v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool calling, invoking external tools on demand, is central to agentic LLMs, yet the mechanism that decides whether a model calls a tool or responds...
arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 15
Interlock: From Local Correctness to Task Completion in Long-Horizon Agents
Interlock is a framework that transforms long‑horizon tasks into typed completion graphs, linking evidence, decisions, and required effects through grounding, coupling, and realization edges. It compiles these graphs into a resettable workspace, a public request, and an evaluation rubric, and uses source‑coverage, public‑input, and agent‑as‑judge reviews to ensure that all mandatory requirements are met. Fine‑tuning Qwen3.6 backbones on Interlock‑generated trajectories improves pass rates on AutomationBench, JobBench, and Harvey LAB, showing that the synthesized experience benefits external task environments.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Sep 28
Self-Evolving Agents via Likelihood-Guided Tool-Space Optimization
Self-evolving agents can continually improve their behavior, while tools define the executable action space through which they interact with the environment. However, exposing the full tool library to...