Agent Skills Can Be Harmful: An Empirical Study of Skill-Induced Failures in LLM Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.11888v1
• Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:15:19 GMT
• Title: Agent Skills Can Be Harmful: An Empirical Study of Skill-Induced Failures in LLM Agents
• Abstract summary: This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of skill-induced agent failures by attributing task failures and cost regressions to specific loaded skills.<n>We instantiate this framework on SkillsBench and SWE-Skills-Bench, yielding 307 skill-induced failures, including 125 functional failures and 182 efficiency regressions.<n>We propose research topics and tooling improvements for safer and more cost-aware skill reuse.
• Score: 9.71657681051469
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Agent skills are the de facto mechanism for extending LLM agents with reusable guidance. A skill can shape the agent's task execution, including planning, tool use, problem-solving, and validation. Prior work reported mixed results of agent skills: some skills improve task success rates, while others have no effect, increase token use and execution time, and even reduce success rates. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of skill-induced agent failures by attributing task failures and cost regressions to specific loaded skills. We introduce a differential analysis framework that attributes a failure or regression to a skill by comparing a target skill-guided run against a no-skill or semantically matched skill reference run that solves the same task, or solves it more cheaply. We instantiate this framework on SkillsBench and SWE-Skills-Bench, yielding 307 skill-induced failures, including 125 functional failures and 182 efficiency regressions. We also build SkillTriage, a taxonomy-guided attribution tool that normalizes paired cases, extracts differential evidence, and produces triage reports. Our major findings include: (1) Skill induced functional failures are rarely caused by obviously irrelevant skills; instead, seemingly relevant skills often make the agent incorrectly implement or omit task-required implementation elements. (2) Skill-induced efficiency regressions are not explained by prompt length alone. (3) The largest sources within Excessive Procedure are excessive verification and heavy implementation pipelines, contributing 67 and 30 cases, respectively. This shows that skills often turn validation checklists and construction recipes into mandatory work. Based on our findings, we propose research topics and tooling improvements for safer and more cost-aware skill reuse.

Related papers

• When Not to Imitate: Boundary-Aware Skill Memory for Reliable Tool-Use LLM Agents [62.10623192614306]
  Extracting skills from past successes is critical for the efficient evolution of Large Language Model (LLM) agents.<n>We propose textbfBoundary-Aware Skill Memory (BASM), which augments each skill with explicit boundary fields.<n>BASM consistently outperforms success-distilled skill-memory baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-23T10:16:06Z)
• Demystifying Agent Skills: Why They Work-Until They Don't [58.92875630998418]
  Existing evaluations largely measure whether skills improve aggregated task success, leaving a more fundamental question underexplored: emphtextbfWhen do skills help, why do they work, and where do they fail?<n>We isolate the effects of representation, outcome annotation, retrieval difficulty, and cross-framework of skills.<n>We consolidate these observations into a taxonomy of three high-level categories and twelve skill-use modes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-14T07:26:38Z)
• Skill-Use: Can LLMs Actually Use Skills in Agentic Harnesses? [38.776828282073865]
  We introduce Skill-Use, a benchmark that evaluates skill use under progressive disclosure.<n> Trigger measures whether the agent invokes the relevant skill, Compliance measures how faithfully it follows the prescribed procedure, and Boundary measures whether it avoids forbidden operations.<n>A Skill-Use (SU) score combines the three and credits execution only after the skill is triggered.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T13:29:16Z)
• The Regression Tax: Decomposing Why Skills Help and Hurt LLM Agents [0.12891210250935145]
  Adding procedural skills to an LLM agent is typically evaluated by average improvement in task success.<n>This metric hides an important cost: skills can also make agents worse.<n>We measure both sides by comparing agents with and without skills across nearly 6,000 runs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-24T17:50:03Z)
• SkillAudit: Ground-Truth-Free Skill Evolution via Paired Trajectory Auditing [81.51044612408793]
  SkillAudit is a framework for evolving agent skills without ground-truth feedback.<n>To turn behavioral differences into edit guidance, SkillAudit uses Process-Aligned Contrastive Evaluation.<n>It routes edits through two pipelines: Refine removes noisy or irrelevant guidance from broadly useful skills, while Repair replaces passages that conflict with the task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-12T08:20:09Z)
• SkillJuror: Measuring How Agent Skill Organization Changes Runtime Behavior [23.11308948097101]
  Current benchmarks rarely distinguish what a Skill says from how it is organized.<n>We study this distinction through Progressive Disclosure, where a concise root file points agents to supporting resources on demand.<n>We present SkillJuror, a framework for evaluating Skill writing paradigms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-10T01:11:50Z)
• What Should a Skill Remember? Quality--Cost Trade-offs in Cost-Aware Skill Rewriting for Language Model Agents [58.87681796862133]
  We study skill rewriting through an economic lens.<n>Our framework profiles skill structure and rewrites skills using information-preservation strategies.<n> Experiments on SkillsBench reveal distinct quality--cost trade-offs across strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-08T12:36:51Z)
• SkillComposer: Learning to Evolve Agent Skills for Specification and Generalization [99.18305770138677]
  Agent skills are reusable strategies that guide agent reasoning and action.<n>Current skill construction methods treat the problem as one-shot extraction.<n>We introduce SkillComposer, a framework that decomposes skill construction into three learnable operations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T12:16:08Z)
• SkillRevise: Improving LLM-Authored Agent Skills via Trace-Conditioned Skill Revision [41.562357872885826]
  We propose SkillRevise, an execution-grounded framework designed to iteratively refine agent skills.<n>SkillRevise diagnoses skill defects from execution evidence, retrieves relevant repair principles from a general memory, and applies execution-anchored edits.<n>It substantially outperforms one-shot baselines, improving the base agent's success rate on SkillsBench from 36.05% to 61.63%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-31T10:19:13Z)
• SkillGen: Verified Inference-Time Agent Skill Synthesis [60.927977774369516]
  SkillGen is a framework that synthesizes a single auditable skill from trajectories generated by a base agent.<n>It identifies reusable success patterns, recurring failure modes, and behaviors that appear in nearby successes but are missing from failures.<n>A key novelty in SkillGen is that we model agent skills as interventions to empirically verify the net effect of skills on the overall performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-09T19:24:11Z)
• SkillOS: Learning Skill Curation for Self-Evolving Agents [67.94374107466957]
  We propose SkillOS, an experience-driven RL training recipe for learning skill curation in self-evolving agents.<n>SkillOS pairs a frozen agent executor that retrieves and applies skills with a trainable skill curator that updates an external SkillRepo from accumulated experience.<n>We show that SkillOS consistently outperforms memory-free and strong memory-based baselines in both effectiveness and efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T17:31:50Z)

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.