Verified Tool Calls Improve LLM Agent Reliability Under Non-Atomic Failures

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.02645v1
• Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 16:16:14 GMT
• Title: Verified Tool Calls Improve LLM Agent Reliability Under Non-Atomic Failures
• Abstract summary: Real-world systems exhibit non-atomic behaviors such as timeouts after dispatch, delayed visibility, and partial state updates.<n>These mismatches lead to reliability issues including duplicate actions, task success, and unnecessary tool executions.<n>A lightweight, verification-aware tool wrapper is introduced that augments tool calls with postcondition verification, verify-before-retry logic, and idempotency keys.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM) agents rely on external tools to perform multistage tasks. Existing agent frameworks typically assume that tool calls are atomic and return binary success or failure signals. However, real-world systems exhibit non-atomic behaviors such as timeouts after dispatch, delayed visibility, and partial state updates. These mismatches lead to reliability issues including duplicate actions, task success, and unnecessary tool executions. A lightweight, verification-aware tool wrapper is introduced that augments tool calls with postcondition verification, verify-before-retry logic, and idempotency keys. The approach is evaluated in a controlled simulated environment with injected non-atomic failures across multiple task templates. The results demonstrate that the proposed method significantly reduces duplicate actions, while maintaining comparable task success rates. Overall, the findings suggest that strengthening tool interaction semantics is a promising direction for improving LLM agent reliability without requiring modifications to the underlying language model.

Related papers

• ScrambleToolBench: Agents Search Exhaustively Even When Their Own Map Points to the Next Step [74.83535434786145]
  We introduce ScrambleToolBench, an interactive terminal benchmark designed to isolate behavioral reasoning.<n>The benchmark requires agents to uncover hidden tool behaviors entirely through trial-and-error interaction.<n>Our evaluation of state-of-the-art language models reveals that successful initial discovery does not translate into robust adaptation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T15:07:46Z)
• Constraint Tax in Open-Weight LLMs: An Empirical Study of Tool Calling Suppression Under Structured Output Constraints [37.92327096151557]
  This paper reports reproducible phenomenon observed in a production Agent system.<n>Multiple open-weight models cease invoking tools despite maintaining high schema compliance.<n>We propose Transparent Two-Execution, an inference-time strategy that decouples tool execution from schema-constrained response generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-24T09:14:18Z)
• 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)
• Act While Thinking: Accelerating LLM Agents via Pattern-Aware Speculative Tool Execution [18.50317396128381]
  PASTE is a Pattern-Aware Speculative Tool Execution method designed to hide tool latency through speculation.<n>We show that PASTE reduces average task completion time by 48.5% and improves tool execution throughput by 1.8x.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-19T13:36:50Z)
• 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)
• Sponge Tool Attack: Stealthy Denial-of-Efficiency against Tool-Augmented Agentic Reasoning [58.432996881401415]
  Recent work augments large language models (LLMs) with external tools to enable agentic reasoning.<n>We propose Sponge Tool Attack (STA), which disrupts agentic reasoning solely by rewriting the input prompt.<n>STA generates benign-looking prompt rewrites from the original one with high semantic fidelity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-24T19:36:51Z)
• The Bitter Lesson of Diffusion Language Models for Agentic Workflows: A Comprehensive Reality Check [54.08619694620588]
  We present a comprehensive evaluation of dLLMs across two distinct agentic paradigms: Embodied Agents and Tool-Calling Agents.<n>Our results on Agentboard and BFCL reveal a "bitter lesson": current dLLMs fail to serve as reliable agentic backbones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T11:45:39Z)
• Internal Representations as Indicators of Hallucinations in Agent Tool Selection [5.2107604548805915]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in tool calling and tool usage.<n>LLMs suffer from hallucinations where they choose incorrect tools, provide malformed parameters and exhibit 'tool bypass' behavior.<n>We present a computationally efficient framework that detects tool-calling hallucinations in real-time by leveraging LLMs' internal representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-08T18:38:45Z)
• DoVer: Intervention-Driven Auto Debugging for LLM Multi-Agent Systems [48.971606069204825]
  DoVer is an intervention-driven debug framework for large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems.<n>It augments hypothesis generation with active verification through targeted interventions.<n>DoVer flips 18-28% of failed trials into successes, achieves up to 16% milestone progress, and validates or refutes 30-60% of failure hypotheses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-07T09:23:48Z)
• Failure Makes the Agent Stronger: Enhancing Accuracy through Structured Reflection for Reliable Tool Interactions [10.598440138966028]
  Current self-reflection practices rely on prompts or one-way reasoning.<n>We propose structured reflection, which turns the path from error to repair into an explicit, controllable, and trainable action.<n>Experiments on BFCL v3 and Tool-Reflection-Bench show large gains in multi-turn tool-call success and error recovery, and a reduction of redundant calls.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-23T09:35:49Z)
• Reinforcement Learning for Machine Learning Engineering Agents [52.03168614623642]
  We show that agents backed by weaker models that improve via reinforcement learning can outperform agents backed by much larger, but static models.<n>We propose duration- aware gradient updates in a distributed asynchronous RL framework to amplify high-cost but high-reward actions.<n>We also propose environment instrumentation to offer partial credit, distinguishing almost-correct programs from those that fail early.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-01T18:04:10Z)

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.