When Tool Calls Succeed but Workflows Fail: Anomalies at the Agent-Tool Boundary
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.15397v1
- Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 11:31:06 GMT
- Title: When Tool Calls Succeed but Workflows Fail: Anomalies at the Agent-Tool Boundary
- Abstract summary: Under retries, speculative execution, and partial failures, the resulting external state may be inconsistent with the workflow's intended resolution.<n>Advanced transaction models address related failures, but assume that lower-level operations expose the semantics they depend on.<n>We contribute an effect-history model that separates events in the external world from the runtime's observations of them, and a catalog of eight recurring external-effect anomalies.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: AI agents increasingly execute long-running workflows that externalize effects through independently supplied tools. Under retries, speculative execution, concurrency, and partial failures, the resulting external state may be inconsistent with the workflow's intended resolution: required effects may be missing or duplicated, aborted effects may survive, and committed effects may depend on provisional state that is later withdrawn. Advanced transaction models address related failures, but assume that lower-level operations expose the semantics they depend on: whether an effect occurred, whether it can be compensated, staged, or safely reordered. Shared agent-tool interfaces usually do not. We contribute an effect-history model that separates events in the external world from the runtime's observations of them, and a catalog of eight recurring external-effect anomalies. From the catalog we derive the boundary capabilities required to exclude each anomaly in general, and four points where black-box tool invocation alone cannot provide a general guarantee. We then ask how much of this is expressible in a widely used shared tool interface, measuring the use of the standard annotation vocabulary across 98,291 tools exposed by registered Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. The fields are widely emitted but provide only coarse call-level hints, and none of the required capabilities is fully expressible. These results motivate reusable transactional contracts at the tool boundary.
Related papers
- Callability Is Not Operability: Controlled Interface Interventions for LLM Agents [21.5112880944537]
We study whether a tool interface exposes the action-relevant state and semantics needed for an agent to continue safely under operational uncertainty.<n>We operationalize tool operability through Agent-First Tooling (AFT), a set of interface mechanisms spanning selective capability discovery, execution lifecycle and recovery, explicit external-effect semantics, machine-readable results, and postcondition verification.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-23T07:13:50Z) - 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) - From Profiling to Synthesis: Benchmarking Implicit Behavioral Alignment in Personalized LLM Agents [56.187590188698955]
Large Language Models have enabled increasingly capable autonomous agents, yet personalization remains critical for making such agents practically useful.<n>Recent benchmarks have begun evaluating personalization in agents, but they largely rely on static preference snapshots, fixed interaction logs, or question answering over predefined user profiles.<n>We introduce IBA-Bench, a benchmark for implicit behavioral alignment constructed from longitudinal interaction histories.<n>We propose IBA-Agent, an agent framework that reconciles conflicting priorities through broad retrieval and trajectory-level alignment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-03T12:52:04Z) - Verified Tool Calls Improve LLM Agent Reliability Under Non-Atomic Failures [0.0]
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.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-31T16:16:14Z) - Cordon: Semantic Transactions for Tool-Using LLM Agents [11.567293065381918]
This paper introduces Cordon, a transactional runtime system for staging and validating agent effects before commit.<n>It reduces irreversible-effect failures while preserving benign task completion with modest approval and latency overhead.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-16T06:21:14Z) - ClawForge: Generating Executable Interactive Benchmarks for Command-Line Agents [59.626170560327274]
We present textbfClawForge, a generator-backed benchmark framework for executable command-line categories under state conflict.<n>We instantiate this framework as the ClawForge-Bench (17 scenarios, 6 ability categories)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-13T21:34:08Z) - 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) - FAMA: Failure-Aware Meta-Agentic Framework for Open-Source LLMs in Interactive Tool Use Environments [60.3427704389541]
Large Language Models are being increasingly deployed as the decision-making core of autonomous agents.<n>Yet, in conversational benchmarks, these agents frequently fail due to the cascading effects of incorrect decision-making.<n>We present the Failure-Aware Meta-Agentic framework to tackle these challenges.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-28T02:21:53Z) - 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) - Atomix: Timely, Transactional Tool Use for Reliable Agentic Workflows [3.1978093202244704]
Atomix is a runtime that provides progress-aware transactional semantics for agent tool calls.<n>Atomix tags each call with a epoch, tracks per-resource frontiers, and commits only when progress predicates indicate safety.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-16T15:46:19Z) - 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)
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.