arXiv AI
Repair or Resample? Rethinking Failure Debugging in LLM Multi-Agent Systems
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Aug 3
Autonomous Repair for Multi-Agent Systems via Monte-Carlo Tree Search
arXiv:2607. 29055v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent systems (MAS) are increasingly deployed to solve complex tasks.
arXiv AI
Aug 7
TRAJDEBUG: Tracing Error Lifecycle to Identify Critical Failures in Long-Horizon Agent Trajectories
arXiv:2608. 06346v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based agentic systems have shown remarkable capabilities in complex domains, while suffering from cascading errors and difficulty in debugging.
arXiv AI
Jul 14
AgentCheck: A Reproduce-Intervene-Mitigate Workbench for LLM Agents over MCP
arXiv:2607. 11098v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using LLM agents are mostly evaluated assuming all tools work.
arXiv AI
Jul 22
AgentDebugX: An Open-Source Toolkit for Failure Observability, Attribution, and Recovery in LLM Agents
arXiv:2607. 18754v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agent failures are difficult to debug because the step where an error surfaces is often not the one that caused it.
arXiv AI
Jul 13
Failure as a Process: An Anatomy of CLI Coding Agent Trajectories
arXiv:2607. 09510v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) coding agents are increasingly deployed to autonomously perform software engineering tasks in terminal-based environments, making their reliability a growing concern.
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 15
RESKILL: Explicit Failure Attribution and Structured Repair for Interactive Language Agents
arXiv:2609.15684v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language agents increasingly rely on reusable skills, but post-failure repair is often handled by opaque one-shot reflection: a model generates a skill...