The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
arXiv:2605.09252v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Tool-augmented LLM agents tend to call tools indiscriminately, even when the model can answer directly. Each unnecessary call wastes API fees and l...
arXiv:2610.34653v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Latency-sensitive spoken agents must know not only which tool to call, but also when they have heard enough to act. Waiting for the turn to complete de...
arXiv:2609.35804v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in various natural language processing tasks, leading to their widespread deployment...
arXiv:2610.09163v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Task-oriented conversational agents remain fragile under real world conversation scenarios as they rarely follow a predictable script, especially when...
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:2606. 05799v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing calibration methods for Large Language Models (LLMs) often overlook a critical dimension of trustworthiness: a model's {\em behavioral robustness} to irrelevant or misleading information.