Interface-Induced Trajectory Censoring

Agent evaluations report a tool-call rate read off the serving stack. That number can be zero while the model is emitting well-formed calls: the interface censors the trajectory before anything downstream sees it. On BFCL v4's own data, executor and scorer, holding weights, cases, decoding and seeds fixed and changing only the serving adapter, the same model scores 0.00 or 0.96 / 0.19. A 2x2 over chat template and parser locates the effect exactly: both main effects are exactly zero and all of it sits in the interaction -- no component is defective, and repairing one side of the contract buys precisely nothing. On tau-bench's 115 interactive retail tasks the same swap moves server-parsed calls from 0 to 636 and tasks reaching any tool execution from 0 to 103. Our probe reproduces the funnel across a 21x scale range of Qwen2.5-Coder: the server parses 0/100 at every size while well-formed emitted calls rise to 80/100 at 32B (~72 after calibration against an adjudicated gold standard). Under a matched envelope, across a comparable scale span, the silent fraction stays at 0-2, a prediction committed to the repository before the run. Llama-3.1-8B's 23% rate of calling the task function itself as a tool falls to 0 under one strict:true flag. The mismatch reaches inside the training loop, and its consequence is scale-dependent: in verl's AgentLoop at 7B, 45 of 115 generations carry a complete call; 0 are accepted, 0 execute, 0 return an observation. At 1.5B the same zero is over-determined, so we report the two scales separately. At evaluation time, repairing the adapter restores the mechanism but not a significant outcome gain: parsing 0->84, rescues 0->9, pass rate 53->62 (n.s.). We release a 98-line preflight check that catches every silent failure here. The observed tool-call rate is not a property of the model alone; it is a property of the model-interface stack that measures it.

Calibration is the Bottleneck: An Action-Class Diagnostic of Multi-Turn Tool-Calling

Multi-turn tool calling is a core evaluation scenario for large language model (LLM) agents. On public tool-calling benchmarks, open-weight models now approach or even surpass closed-source frontier models in aggregate accuracy. However, this metric averages over many different multi-turn situations and obscures whether progress is balanced across them. We propose an action-class-oriented diagnostic framework that decomposes multi-turn failures into two orthogonal modes: action-class miscalibration and action-execution failure. The framework operates over a four-class action space (TOOL_CALL/ASK/REFUSE/CONFIRM) and introduces a self-revealing upper bound Acc <= GAR (Gold Action Recall); the two modes show up as bound violation (Acc > GAR, exposing state-grader masking of miscalibration) and large bound slack (GAR >> Acc, localizing execution failure within TOOL_CALL). We validate it on a panel of tool-calling models across multiple multi-turn benchmarks. Across our panel, the diagnostic reveals action-class miscalibration as a substantial failure mode the state grader cannot see. This gap inflates standing for heavily tool-trained families, which our diagnostic separates from families with context-appropriate action choice. Calibration is reshapable through context-only perturbations, but the reshape is heterogeneous: a single perturbation moves accuracy in opposite directions across families (up to +11.5 vs -21.0 pp on the same scenario), and its effect further depends on the perturbation mechanism. We argue that multi-turn tool-calling evaluations should supplement aggregate accuracy with action-class diagnostics that expose what the model actually does in each scenario.

CAST: Critique-Aware Supervision for Training Reliable Long-Horizon Tool-Calling Agents

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed in long-horizon, interactive, and stateful environments. In these settings, a single wrong action, such as refunding the wrong purchase, can cause irreversible task failure and must be intercepted before execution. Such failures may not appear in every single run, but can emerge across repeated trials, making reliability across steps and trials critical. However, ensuring agentic reliability is challenging: even frontier LLMs struggle to explain why an action may be wrong, especially in long, intertwined trajectories governed by domain-specific policies. Much recent work relies on prompt-based critique agents, while optimization-based methods lack a systematic way to produce rich verification rationales for training. We address this gap with CAST, a critique-aware training framework that converts sparse task outcomes into action-level supervision for critique learning and policy optimization. CAST analyzes agent trajectories to synthesize structured rationales explaining action validity under partial observability. The resulting critique model is used to construct critique-aware training data for optimizing the policy model. Fine-tuning Qwen3-family models on dynamic tool-calling benchmarks, CAST improves reliability across domains, outperforming GPT-OSS-120B by over 10% pass^4 on Retail tasks and yielding an additional 9% improvement on Telehealth in an out-of-domain setting. These results demonstrate that critique-aware training improves the robustness of LLM agents in realistic dynamic environments.

The Calls are Coming from Inside the Model: Investigating Probe-based Detection of Tool-Calling Errors in LLMs

The hidden states of large language models (LLMs) are known to capture rich information relating to model knowledge and behavior that can be hard to extract from examination of input and output alone. As LLM-based systems increasingly interface with the external world, one area of concern is detecting incorrect or improper use of tools. Motivated by this, we study the effectiveness of using linear probes to detect incorrect tool-calls, measuring probe efficacy across 18 tool-calling LLMs evaluated on the Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard. Overall, we find that probing is an effective means to catch a range of different tool-calling errors, including errors arising from using an argument that has the wrong value but the correct type, which might not be recorded by standard logging frameworks. Important factors in success include model size, probing layer, and model post-training type. We also show that probes are capable of generalizing to novel types of errors, which is critical in real world deployments.

Tunable Tool-Call Rates in LLM Agents via Representation Steering

Deciding whether to call a tool is a core competence of an LLM agent, and a costly one to get wrong: needless calls add latency, accrue cost, and may trigger irreversible side effects, while missing calls leave the model confidently wrong on questions it could only answer through tool-calls. Models manage this balance poorly, both over-using and under-using tools. Existing methods such as post-training and prompt engineering are expensive and difficult to modify at inference time. We show that whether an instruction-tuned model calls a tool can be controlled by a single linear direction in its residual stream, extracted without any training from the model's own tool-use preference signal and turned into an inference-time intervention with no prompt change. Adding the direction with strength $α$ moves the call rate monotonically from near $0\% $ to over $90\%$ while keeping calls well-formed. The steering works in both directions: dialing it down suppresses calls, and dialing it up induces new calls that land precisely on the questions the model cannot answer from its own knowledge. We also show that the direction generalizes to unseen tools with strength comparable to each tool's own direction and without favoring any specific tool choice. With live tool execution, a single sweep of the steering traces a cost/accuracy Pareto frontier and nearly doubles open-domain QA accuracy ($0.29 \! \rightarrow \! 0.56$); the same recipe transfers across a diverse range of models spanning dense, MoE, and multimodal architectures, without any training. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/YuqiChen4188/Steering-Tool-Use-Propensity.

Benchmarking AI Agents for Hardware Design Automation via MCP Tool Calling

We ask whether AI agents powered by locally deployed large language models can reliably automate expert-defined hardware design workflows in an industry-realistic tool-calling setting. In these environments, engineers issue repetitive, dependency-ordered operations---such as creating components, adding ports, and wiring connections---through specialised tools. Confidentiality constraints on component specifications and naming conventions often preclude hosted proprietary APIs, motivating the use of locally deployed models. To study this setting, we build a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that reproduces the state and dependency logic of a proprietary hardware design tool used in embedded system development and construct a benchmark covering single-operation edits, multi-step dependency chains, invalid requests, misspelled prompts, and multi-server tool contexts. We evaluate seven open-source models comparing pipeline choices including system prompts, tool-description detail, context scope, and single-agent versus multi-agent architectures. Results show that strong models can achieve near-complete expected-call coverage on the benchmarked workflows, but reliability depends strongly on both task structure and agent configuration. Comprehensive tool descriptions consistently reduce failures, few-shot prompting can cause severe inaction for some models, cumulative context harms constrained models, and multi-agent decomposition helps weak workers or long sessions at the cost of additional calls. These findings provide practical guidance for deploying local LLM agents in stateful hardware design environments.

PROOF-Gen: From Optimized Data to Better Distillation

Supervised fine-tuning on teacher-generated trajectories is the standard first stage for distilling tool-calling capabilities into deployable models. Post-training pipelines that drive shipped tool-calling agents re-run this stage on a daily or weekly cadence, paying the frontier-teacher cost each cycle, yet the mechanism is generate-and-filter (keep the teacher's passing trajectories, discard the rest) and each cycle leaves behind the same hard scenarios because failures supply no signal. On τ2-bench, 57% of teacher trials fail, two-thirds of them near-misses (most tool calls correct, undone by one decisive error). We introduce PROOF-Gen (Per-scenario Reflective Optimization to Overcome FailedGeneration), which recovers golden trajectories from these failures via per-scenario prompt optimization. For each failed task, a reflector analyzes the execution trace and evaluation feedback, then writes corrective guidance that steers the teacher to a passing trajectory. The guidance is stripped before training, so the student learns from clean demonstrations with no task-specific scaffold. On τ2-bench, per-scenario optimization recovers 93% of failed scenarios. Fine-tuned on the combined data, Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 improves from Pass^1=0.132 to 0.529 and Gemma 4 E4B-it gains +7.2pp on BFCL v4 multi-turn. In a deployed pipeline, the method lifts trajectory quality by +6.3pp goal completion and transfers to a deployed on-device model (+1.5pp goal completion; +1.7 to +5.0pp across response-quality metrics), with positive transfer in every locale (non-English average +1.48pp).

ToolRobustBench: Stage-Wise Perturbation Evaluation and Failure Diagnosis for Tool-Calling Agents

Large language models (LLMs) rely on tool calling as a fundamental agent capability, enabling them to invoke external systems and complete tasks beyond text generation. However, clean end-to-end (E2E) success cannot identify where a tool-use failure originates or how it propagates through a call. We introduce ToolRobustBench, a stage-wise diagnostic benchmark for tool-calling agents, where a tool-calling agent is an LLM system that selects a tool, supplies structured arguments, and interprets its returned feedback. ToolRobustBench aligns four perturbation families with the tool-use pipeline: tool-interface, user-intent, tool-output/observation, and runtime-environment perturbations. It attributes failures to tool selection, schema grounding, argument binding, tool-output/runtime-feedback handling, and E2E task success. Experiments on 15,456 single-family instances across 7 models, 16 sampled local tools, 4 perturbation families, and 14 subtypes show high but non-uniform clean performance and substantial robustness degradation, with tool-output/observation perturbation the dominant bottleneck. Mixed-family experiments reveal non-additive failure patterns that are not explained by isolated single-family results. Thus, ToolRobustBench provides a deterministic and cascade-aware benchmark for diagnosing robustness beyond clean tool-calling accuracy;

Noise Floor Audit for Agent Benchmarks

We audit measurement variability for 3 native tool-calling endpoints across 2 providers on the official BFCL multiple and parallel categories, using matched AST grading. At temperature 0, reruns are nearly deterministic across Groq endpoints and a thinking-enabled Gemini setting: ever-flip fractions are 0.7%, 2.0%, and 2.7%, with mean run correlations of 0.997, 0.966, and 0.961. Semantics-preserving prompt perturbations create the larger floor on all endpoints, with median perturbation paired SDs 11x to 58x larger than rerun paired SDs. The failure character also shifts: malformed-output failures account for 30%, 7%, and <1% of task failures, so marginal accuracy hides not only stability but also failure mode.

DART-SD: Diamond-topology Aware Retrieval and Tuning for Self-Distillation of Multi-Turn Tool-Calling Agents

Equipping Large Language Models (LLMs) with multi-turn tool-calling capabilities is essential for building autonomous agents. However, progress is fundamentally limited by the reliance on full-length trajectory imitation. For tasks involving multiple order-independent sub-goals, the optimal solution space forms a vast combinatorial diamond lattice. Forcing this rich topology into monolithic trajectories causes a severe topological collapse, indiscriminately penalizing valid alternative explorations and severely degrading policy diversity. To address this, we propose DART-SD (Diamond-topology Aware Retrieval and Tuning for Self-Distillation), a novel framework that shifts the paradigm from global forcing to topology-guided localized correction. DART-SD first models the execution process as a converging Interaction-State Transition Graph (ISTG), faithfully capturing the inherent diamond topology of successful and failed exploratory paths. During autonomous rollouts, the framework identifies the Critical Topological Breakpoint (CTB) and retrieves success-supported recovery references. Finally, we introduce a progressive self-distillation paradigm through CTB-guided localized supervision, ensuring that the training loss is calculated exclusively on the generated recovery steps while strictly protecting the valid reasoning prefix from destructive gradient updates. Experiments on complex multi-turn tool-calling benchmarks demonstrate that DART-SD significantly outperforms traditional full-trajectory baselines.

Looped Language Models Improve Compositional Tool Calling

Looped language models have shown promising results on reasoning benchmarks, yet their potential for agentic tool use remains largely unexplored. We study this question in compositional tool-calling settings, where models must coordinate multiple API calls, maintain intermediate state, and preserve dependencies across tool interactions. We evaluate native and retrofitted looped language models on API-Bank, BFCL, and NESTful, comparing looped and non-looped models trained under matched supervised fine-tuning recipes and varying recurrent depth at inference time. In controlled experiments, recurrent computation generally benefits compositional and dependency-aware tool use, while providing smaller and more model-dependent gains on isolated API invocation. Accuracy on multi-step tool use generally increases with recurrent depth; adaptive inference, however, achieves a more favorable compute-performance trade-off by allocating additional computation only when needed. Our results suggest that looped language models are a promising architecture for agentic systems that require reliable planning, coordination, and execution of compositional tool use workflows.

Actionable Hallucination Detection: Translating Latent Uncertainty into Agentic Critique

Large Language Models (LLMs) deployed as AI agents frequently exhibit user specification-grounding failures, executing hallucinated, undesired actions to force a resolution rather than expressing uncertainty. Existing detection methods fail to provide actionable, real-time correction as they either do not localize the hallucinations, or incur prohibitive inference latency. We introduce the Latent Critic, a lightweight low-rank adapter (LoRA) that operates concurrently with a frozen base LLM's generation to actively restructure the transformer's residual stream---amplifying latent grounding signals and translating them into localized, natural language feedback within a single sequence. By refining the base model's native uncertainty signals, this manipulation of the latent space enables reliable, granular detection without the overhead of secondary inference loops. Mechanistic analysis via activation patching and layer-wise probing shows that this rank-invariant behavior restructures pre-existing uncertainty geometry into a linearly separable representation that transfers more reliably than base model representations alone. Using tool-calling as an instantiation of granular hallucinations, we validate the detection and downstream improvements enabled by the Latent Critic architecture across Qwen and Llama-based models. Demonstrating superior real-time efficacy, our approach significantly outperforms equivalent-scale fine-tuned external detectors, semantic entropy baselines, and passive internal probes in isolating hallucinations, achieving 0.966 AUROC and >80% accuracy in localization (e.g., ungrounded: date). When deployed in a closed-loop ReAct environment, the Critic acts as a negligible latency guardrail, intercepting hallucinations before execution to prevent undesired actions while simultaneously leveraging this specific localized feedback to enable efficient agent self-correction.

The Bitter Lesson of Tool Calling

Tool use transforms LLMs into agents that act beyond their training data, and for code-capable models, programmatic tool calling extends this further by replacing rigid JSON calls with scripts that chain and parallelize naturally. However, a systematic evaluation of tools as code on an established benchmark across current and prior model generations under real-world task conditions has not been conducted. In this work, we empirically compare programmatic tool calling (PTC) to native JSON tool calling across 14 language models on BFCL v4. In the programmatic tool calling paradigm, tools are exposed as typed Python stubs that the model invokes through code, with execution and results handled in a single agent turn. Programmatic tool calling matches or exceeds native JSON tool calling in 11 of 14 models on BFCL v4, with the GPT-5.6 family achieving a 10.6% improvement over the JSON tool calling baseline. Further, it matches or outperforms baseline in 13 of 14 models under parallel fan-out, and holds stable under context rot conditions where baseline degrades 2.3% on average. Our results demonstrate that programmatic tool calling is a viable and robust alternative to JSON tool calling, with performance tracking model capability across release generations.

Scalable LLM Agent Tool Access in the Cloud

LLM agents increasingly rely on tool calling to act on external systems, and the Model Context Protocol (MCP) has quickly become its de facto interface. Operating MCP at cloud scale, however, becomes difficult. On the tool provider side, legacy services are not directly callable through MCP; the rapid protocol development also creates ongoing compatibility cost. On the agent side, the number of accessible tool is limited by the LLM context window and inference overhead; mounting a large tool set increases token usage and inference latency and can reduce task success rate. Moreover, for stateful MCP backends with multiple replicas, preserving session affinity increases client-side complexity. We present a cloud-scale gateway system for MCP service. It breaks the direct-connect model on the data plane and offloads legacy service integration, consolidating incompatible MCP variants, access control, tool recommendation, and session-aware routing to the gateway. Hybrid retrieval sustains 98% Top-15 recall; it scales agent tool access to 3,000+ with high tool selection accuracy, and reduces tool selection time by $8.9\times$ and token usage by $23.8\times$, with low per-call overhead, stable under scale-out. Finally, we share the lessons learned from deploying the gateway system in production.

The Remarkable Effectiveness of Providing AI Agents with Natural Language Tools: A Replication Study Validating NLT Performance Across 14 Models

This study independently replicates and extends the Natural Language Tools (NLT) framework of Johnson et al.~(2025), which questions the use of structured tool calling in large language model (LLM) agentic systems. We evaluated NLT across 14 models and 8,560 trials, adding newer frontier, reasoning, and open-weight models to the original set. The results confirm the core findings and add detail. NLT improves tool-calling accuracy by 14.9 percentage points overall (62.3\% versus 47.4\% structured) and reduces critical errors by 93\% (51 versus 755 errors). The gains depend on model capability: models without native tool calling, reasoning models, and smaller models gain substantially (+24.0pp to +43.1pp), while heavily optimized frontier models (GPT-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro) show smaller or reversed advantages. This matches recent analyses of reinforcement-learning-optimized tool use (Martinez, 2025). NLT also cuts token usage by 25.2\%. The reliability and efficiency advantages compound in recursive agentic workflows, where agents chain many tool calls across sub-agents: a structured failure triggers retries, fallback routing, and coordination overhead, while NLT avoids most of that cost at the source. This work makes three contributions: (1) the first independent validation of NLT using open-source tooling, (2) evidence that model capability moderates NLT's advantages (Chen et al., 2025; Zhang et al., 2025), and (3) a measurement of NLT's reliability benefit (93\% fewer errors), its most deployment-relevant property given the known fragility of structured tool calling. NLT is a practical alternative to structured tool calling, especially for production systems that value reliability over parseability.

Constraint Tax in Open-Weight LLMs: An Empirical Study of Tool Calling Suppression Under Structured Output Constraints

Tool Calling and Structured Output are two core capabilities of modern Agent systems, yet their interaction under joint deployment conditions remains insufficiently understood. This paper reports a reproducible phenomenon observed in a production Agent system: when Tool Calling and JSON Schema constraints are simultaneously enabled, multiple open-weight models cease invoking tools despite maintaining high schema compliance. We refer to this behavior as Tool Suppression. Through controlled experiments across multiple model families and deployment settings, we consistently reproduce Tool Suppression under joint constraints, while tool execution and schema compliance remain functional when evaluated independently. Further analysis reveals that JSON Schema constraints are compiled into grammar-based token masks, causing tool-call tokens to become unreachable during decoding. This provides an implementation-level explanation for the observed behavior. To interpret the phenomenon, we formulate the Constraint Priority Inversion (CPI) hypothesis, which suggests that schema satisfaction may dominate action-selection behavior under multiple simultaneous constraints. We present CPI as a behavioral hypothesis consistent with the observed evidence rather than a verified internal mechanism. To mitigate the problem, we propose Transparent Two-Pass Execution, an inference-time strategy that decouples tool execution from schema-constrained response generation. Experimental results show that this approach restores tool invocation while preserving structured output guarantees without requiring model retraining. These findings suggest that evaluating tool use and structured output separately may overlook important reliability issues in production Agent systems. Code, data, and docs will be released at https://github.com/Fzsama/Constrain-Tax-26-06.git.

Self-Evolution for Multi-Turn Tool-Calling Agents via Divergence-Point Preference Learning

Multi-turn tool-using agents must coordinate long-horizon tool sequences while tracking dialogue state and policy constraints. Existing approaches often separate inference-time orchestration from parameter-level learning, leaving tool selection weakly structured and preference updates vulnerable to train--deployment prompt mismatch. For within-benchmark self-improvement, ToolGraph combines schema-derived topology, transition weights estimated from successful rollouts, and history-aware controls for write prerequisites and repeated-search loops. We then construct 161 preference pairs by locating divergence points via state-based matching and prefix-based alignment, filtered through action-correctness annotations, and train DPO under the same ToolGraph context used at inference. Across 375 tau2-bench tasks, ToolGraph raises the weighted average reward from 0.304 to 0.338 (+11.2% relative), while ToolGraph+DPO reaches 0.355 (+16.8% over the baseline), with the DPO gain concentrated in airline and retail. Fine-grained diagnostics further show that roughly half of telecom trajectories exhaust the step budget before action execution and that chosen reward positivity is the most useful checkpoint signal across our 16 evaluated DPO configurations.

LedgerAgent: Structured State for Policy-Adherent Tool-Calling Agents

Policy-adherent tool-calling agents in customer-service domains must maintain task states across turns while calling tools and obeying domain policies. Task states consist of relevant facts, identifiers, constraints, and conditions observed through user interaction and tool calls. In standard agents, task states are not represented separately. Observations, tool returns, and policy instructions are placed in the prompt, leaving agents to reconstruct the relevant states from the prompt each time they decide what to do next. This design makes state management implicit, creating two common failure modes. An agent may retrieve the right facts but later ground its decision in stale, missing, or incorrect information; and a syntactically valid tool call may still violate a domain policy that depends on the current task state. We introduce \textsc{LedgerAgent}, an inference-time method for tool-calling agents that maintains observed task states in a separate ledger and renders the states into the prompt. The ledger is also used to check state-dependent policy constraints before environment-changing tool calls are executed, blocking policy violations. Across four customer-service domains and a mixed panel of open- and closed-weight models, \textsc{LedgerAgent} improves average pass\textasciicircum{}k over a standard prompt-based tool-calling approach, with the largest gains under stricter multi-trial consistency metrics.

Beyond Domains: Reusing Web Skills via Transferable Interaction Patterns

Large language model (LLM) web agents are usually deployed as tool callers: each turn, the model reads a fresh page observation and emits one structured tool action. When every action is a low-level primitive, horizons grow quickly and so do policy-facing LLM completions, dominating latency and cost on benchmarks such as Mind2Web and WebArena. Recent systems therefore wrap repeated interaction fragments as web skills: callable tools built from successful trajectories or induced programs, so one call can replace several primitives. However, prior skill libraries are still triggered mainly by instruction similarity or coarse site metadata, which yields low skill reuse on held-out sites and leaves much of the potential step and token reduction on the table. We present SkillMigrator, an agent that learns reusable web skills and transfers them across sites by matching layout structure rather than specific element references. Each induced skill is stored as a transferable interaction pattern (TIP): the skill paired with a structural sketch of the snapshot at induction time. At test time, SkillMigrator retrieves TIPs by layout similarity and grounds their references on the live page. The rest of the stack is standard: accessibility-snapshot observations with stable references, and fixed tool calling over primitives plus skill invocations. Compared with the state-of-the-art approaches, SkillMigrator reduces the average LLM-action count on successful trajectories by 8-10% across both WebArena and Mind2Web at matched success rate.

OGX: An Open-Source, Vendor-Neutral Generative AI Application Server

OGX (Open GenAI Stack) is an open-source AI application server and Python library that implements the APIs of major frontier labs (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google) with pluggable backend providers. Developers building agentic AI applications--such as retrieval-augmented generation pipelines, multi-turn agents, and tool-calling workflows--can develop against a single API surface and deploy with any combination of inference engine, vector database, and safety backend, without changing application code. OGX's primary focus is the Responses API for server-side agentic orchestration, conforming to the Open Responses specification. The server also supports the Anthropic Messages API and Google GenAI Interactions API, decoupling SDK choice from model and deployment decisions. With over 20 inference providers, 13 vector store backends, and a companion Kubernetes Operator for production deployment, OGX serves as the self-hosted, model-agnostic backend for AI-powered developer tools including Claude Code, Codex CLI, OpenCode, and OpenHands. The project has over 8,400 GitHub stars, 242 contributors, and 4,000 commits across nearly two years of public development.

CacheRL:Multi-Turn Tool-Calling Agents via Cached Rollouts and Hybrid Reward

We present CacheRL, a system for training small agent foundation models that achieves 92 percent process accuracy on multi-step tool-calling tasks, approaching GPT-5's 94 percent while requiring 100 times less compute. Our approach addresses three challenges in practical agent training: transferring tool-calling knowledge from large models at scale, enabling reinforcement learning without costly live tool execution, and learning robustly from noisy cached environments. CacheRL introduces three key innovations. First, a hybrid thinking trajectory pipeline augments agent trajectories with LLM-generated reasoning traces, producing training examples that teach models not only what tools to call but also why. Second, the CacheAgentLoop eliminates live execution costs through a three-tier fuzzy cache while preserving trajectory fidelity using token-level masking. Third, a cache-tier-aware reward dynamically adjusts answer-quality weights to avoid penalizing models for cache-induced limitations. Through iterative supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), CacheRL improves Qwen3-4B-Thinking's validation reward from 0.43 to 0.78. On public agentic tool-calling benchmarks, our model achieves competitive performance against frontier models such as GPT-5. Ablation studies show that removing knowledge transfer reduces performance by 41 percent, while cache-aware rewards contribute a 17 percent improvement. Interestingly, reinforcement learning improves training stability but yields limited gains beyond strong supervised fine-tuning, suggesting that data quality and reward design play a more important role than complex optimization methods in building practical small agent models.

GeoNatureAgent Benchmark: Benchmarking LLM Agents for Environmental Geospatial Analysis Across Frontier and Open-Weight Foundation Models

Environmental scientists spend disproportionate effort on data wrangling rather than analysis, and AI agents that automate geospatial workflows remain unvalidated: no benchmark evaluates agents operating through structured tool calling against real APIs. We introduce the GeoNatureAgent Benchmark, the first benchmark for environmental analysis agents that operate via structured tool calls to a production-style geospatial API. It comprises 93 tasks across 18 categories, covering municipality analysis, multi-turn conversation, spatial reasoning, cross-indicator synthesis, error handling and recovery, ranking, comparison, multilingual understanding, habitat analysis, and task rejection. Tasks are evaluated against an open, self-hostable API serving three environmental indicators across Spain and Portugal via sixteen tools. We evaluate seven LLMs (Claude Sonnet 4, DeepSeek V3.2, GLM-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Qwen3-235B, GPT-OSS-120B, Llama 4 Scout) under three temperature-1.0 seeds, reporting capability and per-case cost as orthogonal axes. We find: (1) Claude Sonnet 4 leads at 60.8% +/- 0.8%, followed by DeepSeek V3.2 at 56.3% +/- 3.1%, with no other model above 51%; (2) the cost-accuracy Pareto frontier is occupied mostly by open-weight models, with DeepSeek V3.2 offering 93% of Claude's capability at 11x lower cost ($0.011/case); (3) comparison tasks remain universally unsolved (0% on close-value comparisons), exposing systematic reasoning limits; and (4) structured tool calling against a real API is more discriminative than general-purpose GIS benchmarks, with accuracies 25-35 points lower. We further show extensibility by integrating BigEarthNet V2 land cover for Portugal alongside Spanish CO2 and erosion indicators. The benchmark, harness, and self-hostable API are publicly available.

Pushing the Limits of LLM Tool Calling via Experiential Knowledge Integration and Activation

Large language models (LLMs) rely on tool use to act as autonomous agents, yet often fail in multi-step execution due to insufficient tool-related knowledge and ineffective knowledge activation. Therefore, we present a systematic study on how knowledge influences tool-use performance, covering the stages of knowledge acquisition, activation, and internalization. In the knowledge acquisition stage, we acquire and evaluate various forms of experiential knowledge, and our analysis shows that simple instance-level knowledge can already provide strong and reliable gains, while abstract intent-level knowledge offers limited benefits. At inference time, to activate knowledge, we find that prompting LLM to expand the depth of reasoning yields diminishing returns, whereas expanding the width of reasoning by parallel sampling with aggregation more effectively activates latent experiential knowledge. At training time, for knowledge internalization, post-training with knowledge-augmented data further improves performance, with reinforcement learning outperforming supervised fine-tuning. Based on these insights, we propose the Knowledge-Augmented Tool Execution (KATE), a knowledge-augmented tool execution framework that integrates experiential knowledge with reasoning-width-expanded inference and knowledge-aware training. Experiments on BFCL-V3 and AppWorld demonstrate consistent and substantial improvements over strong baselines across model scales. Our Code is available at https://github.com/hypasd-art/KATE.

Contractual Skills: A GovernSpec Design Framework for Enterprise AI Agents

Skills are increasingly used to package agent instructions, workflows, scripts, and reference materials. In enterprise settings, however, skills often need to express more than task guidance: they must make goals, input boundaries, permissions, evidence requirements, output contracts, quality criteria, verification steps, human approval points, and handoff rules inspectable. This paper proposes contractual skills, a GovernSpec-inspired design framework for organizing SKILL.md files as readable task contracts while preserving lightweight skill discovery and progressive loading. The framework clarifies the boundary between contractual skills, GovernSpec YAML contracts, Model Context Protocol surfaces, tool adapters, runtime guardrails, tracing, and evaluation systems. We evaluate the framework with two offline experiments. A text-generation study covers three enterprise skills, fifteen synthetic tasks, four instruction conditions, and eight generation models, yielding 960 outputs and 1680 cross-judge score records. Contractual skills outperform no-skill and minimal-skill baselines on all tested models. Relative to information-rich plain expanded skills, the gains are small and mixed, suggesting that contractual fields mainly improve checkability and maintainability rather than raw generation quality. A tool-calling challenge covers eight models and 192 simulated tool-call records. Skills usually reduce high-risk tool attempts, but model differences remain and runtime tool guardrails are still required. The results suggest that contractual skills are best understood as a governance layer that makes task intent, boundaries, and acceptance criteria explicit, not as a standalone safety mechanism.

Beyond State Machines: Executing Network Procedures with Agentic Tool-Calling Sequences

Agentic AI will be an essential enabling technology for designing future mobile communication systems, which could provide flexible and customized services, automate complex network operations, and drive autonomous decision-making across the network. This work studies how Large Language Model (LLM)-based network AI agents can be utilized to execute network procedures expressed as sequences of tool invocations. We investigate four approaches, which differ in how the agent obtains the procedure and in how execution is distributed between the agent and the underlying tools. We evaluated the latency and execution correctness across these approaches using a User Equipment (UE) IP allocation procedure as a case study. Furthermore, we conduct a stress test to examine how many sequential procedural steps an LLM agent can reliably execute before failure. Our results show that approaches relying on iterative agent-side reasoning incur higher latency and are more prone to execution errors, while approaches where the procedure is encapsulated within a single tool, which internally orchestrates the required steps by invoking other tools, reduce latency by limiting repeated reasoning. The stress-test results further show that the model with advanced tool-calling capability maintains reliable execution over longer procedures than the other evaluated models; however, all models exhibit reliability degradation as procedure length increases, revealing clear execution limits in multi-step tool-based workflows. To systematically analyze failures in procedure execution, we introduce a procedure-specific error taxonomy that categorizes deviations in multi-step procedural execution.