Model-Adaptive Tool Necessity Reveals the Knowing-Doing Gap in LLM Tool Use

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14038v2
• Date: Sun, 17 May 2026 15:23:37 GMT
• Title: Model-Adaptive Tool Necessity Reveals the Knowing-Doing Gap in LLM Tool Use
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act as autonomous agents that must decide when to answer directly vs. when to invoke external tools.<n>We introduce a model-adaptive definition of tool-necessity, grounded in each model's empirical performance.<n>We find substantial mismatches of 26.5-54.0% and 30.8-41.8%, respectively.
• Score: 47.29360932085394
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act as autonomous agents that must decide when to answer directly vs. when to invoke external tools. Prior work studying adaptive tool use has largely treated tool necessity as a model-agnostic property, annotated by human or LLM judge, and mostly cover cases where the answer is obvious (e.g., fetching the weather vs. paraphrasing text). However, tool necessity in the wild is more nuanced due to the divergence of capability boundaries across models: a problem solvable by a strong model on its own may still require tools for a weaker one. In this work, we introduce a model-adaptive definition of tool-necessity, grounded in each model's empirical performance. Following this definition, we compare the necessity against observed tool-call behavior across four models on arithmetic and factual QA dataset, and find substantial mismatches of 26.5-54.0% and 30.8-41.8%, respectively. To diagnose the failure, we decompose tool use into two stages: an internal cognition stage that reflects whether a model believes a tool is necessary, and an execution stage that determines whether the model actually makes a tool-call action. By probing the LLM hidden states, we find that both signals are often linearly decodable, yet their probe directions become nearly orthogonal in the late-layer, last-token regime that drives the next-token action. By tracing the trajectory of samples in the two-stage process, we further discover that the majority of mismatch is concentrated in the cognition-to-action transition, not in cognition itself. These results reveal a knowing-doing gap in LLM tool-use: improving tool-use reliability requires not only better recognition of when tools are needed, but also better translation of that recognition into action.

Related papers

• Are Tools Always Beneficial? Learning to Invoke Tools Adaptively for Dual-Mode Multimodal LLM Reasoning [44.46498720264651]
  We introduce AutoTool, a model that adaptively decides whether to invoke tools according to the characteristics of each query.<n>Within a reinforcement learning framework, we design an explicit dual-mode reasoning strategy with mode-specific reward functions.<n>Experiments demonstrate that AutoTool exhibits outstanding performance and high efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-19T13:44:26Z)
• LLM Agents Already Know When to Call Tools -- Even Without Reasoning [25.40369702634587]
  LLM agents tend to call tools indiscriminately, even when the model can answer directly.<n>No existing benchmark systematically studies when a tool call is actually needed.<n>We propose When2Tool, a benchmark of 18 environments spanning three categories of tool necessity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-10T01:37:40Z)
• Beyond the Black Box: Interpretability of Agentic AI Tool Use [0.0]
  We introduce a mechanistic-interpretability toolkit built on Sparse Autoencoders and linear probes.<n>The framework reads model states before each action and infers both whether a tool is needed and how consequential the next tool action is likely to be.<n>We train the probes on multi-step trajectories from the NVIDIA Nemotron function-calling dataset and apply the same workflow to GPT-OSS 20B and Gemma 3 27B models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T19:47:30Z)
• When to Trust Tools? Adaptive Tool Trust Calibration For Tool-Integrated Math Reasoning [58.75883713573783]
  Tool-Integrated Reasoning has emerged as a promising paradigm that incorporates tool call and execution within the reasoning trajectory.<n>We find that when the reasoning of the model conflicts with the tool results, the model tends to believe in its own reasoning.<n>We introduce Adaptive Tool Trust (ATTC), a framework that guides the model to adaptively choose to trust or ignore the tool results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T14:14:37Z)
• AgentProcessBench: Diagnosing Step-Level Process Quality in Tool-Using Agents [50.481033105867205]
  We introduce AgentProcessBench, the first benchmark dedicated to evaluating step-level effectiveness in realistic, tool-augmented trajectories.<n>The benchmark comprises 1,000 diverse trajectories and 8,509 human-labeled step annotations with 89.1% inter-annotator agreement.<n>It features a ternary labeling scheme to capture exploration and an error propagation rule to reduce labeling ambiguity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-15T16:13:58Z)
• ToolMATH: A Math Tool Benchmark for Realistic Long-Horizon Multi-Tool Reasoning [11.99927786717109]
  ToolMATH turns math problems into a controlled, correctness-checkable benchmark with tool sets.<n>ToolMATH provides actionable diagnostic evidence of failure modes in tool-augmented agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-24T09:23:12Z)
• AdaReasoner: Dynamic Tool Orchestration for Iterative Visual Reasoning [66.24374176797075]
  We introduce textbfAdaReasoner, a family of multimodal models that learn tool use as a general reasoning skill rather than as tool-specific or explicitly supervised behavior.<n>AdaReasoner is enabled by (i) a scalable data curation pipeline exposing models to long-horizon, multi-step tool interactions; (ii) Tool-GRPO, a reinforcement learning algorithm that prioritizes tool selection and sequencing based on end-task success; and (iii) an adaptive learning mechanism that dynamically regulates tool usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-26T16:04:43Z)
• ET-Agent: Incentivizing Effective Tool-Integrated Reasoning Agent via Behavior Calibration [68.89572566071575]
  ETAgent is a training framework for calibrating agent's tool-use behavior.<n>It is designed to progressively calibrate erroneous behavioral patterns to optimal behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-11T11:05:26Z)
• Adaptive Tool Use in Large Language Models with Meta-Cognition Trigger [49.81945268343162]
  We propose MeCo, an adaptive decision-making strategy for external tool use.<n>MeCo quantifies metacognitive scores by capturing high-level cognitive signals in the representation space.<n>MeCo is fine-tuning-free and incurs minimal cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T15:45:01Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.