arXiv:2601. 05366v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as agents that invoke external tools through structured function calls.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2609.23490v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly execute multi-step workflows through tool use and interaction with users and environments. However, curr...
ToolRobustBench is a stage-wise diagnostic benchmark designed to evaluate and diagnose failures in tool‑calling agents, which are large language models that select tools, provide structured arguments, and interpret tool feedback. The benchmark aligns four perturbation families—tool‑interface, user‑intent, tool‑output/observation, and runtime‑environment—with the tool‑use pipeline, attributing failures to specific stages such as tool selection, schema grounding, argument binding, and feedback handling. Experiments across 15,456 instances, 7 models, and 16 local tools reveal that while overall performance is high, robustness degrades significantly, especially under tool‑output/observation perturbations, and mixed‑family perturbations produce non‑additive failure patterns.
arXiv:2606. 03618v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI-assisted coding agents are bottlenecked by input-token cost.
arXiv:2609.15079v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent LLM architectures, such as LangChain and AutoGen, largely assume English as the lingua franca for internal inter-agent communication, eve...
arXiv:2607. 06008v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: While Large Language Model (LLM) agents excel at monolingual long-horizon planning and tool use, enterprise workflows inherently require processing multilingual resources across extended trajectories.
arXiv:2606. 08840v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Code generation models are typically compared using compact execution benchmarks and aggregate pass rates, but such summaries obscure how performance varies across programming languages, problem families, and failure modes.