# TL-Training: A Task-Feature-Based Framework for Training Large Language Models in Tool Use

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.15495 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15495/

## Key facts

- Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Tool learning and function calling, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 25 of its 31 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 20 Dec 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Tool learning and function calling](https://mlsanity.com/agents/tool-learning-and-function-calling/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16789/) (2023)
- [The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07864/) (2023)
- [Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15334/) (2023)
- [ChatGLM: A Family of Large Language Models from GLM-130B to GLM-4 All Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12793/) (2024)
- [ToolAlpaca: Generalized Tool Learning for Language Models with 3000 Simulated Cases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05301/) (2023)
- [A Comprehensive Capability Analysis of GPT-3 and GPT-3.5 Series Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.10420/) (2023)
- [ToolkenGPT: Augmenting Frozen Language Models with Massive Tools via Tool Embeddings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11554/) (2023)
- [ToolChain*: Efficient Action Space Navigation in Large Language Models with A* Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13227/) (2023)
- [Self-Distillation Bridges Distribution Gap in Language Model Fine-Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13669/) (2024)
- [T-Eval: Evaluating the Tool Utilization Capability of Large Language Models Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.14033/) (2023)
- [ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10753/) (2024)
- [A Closer Look at the Limitations of Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.05119/) (2024)
- [Seal-Tools: Self-Instruct Tool Learning Dataset for Agent Tuning and Detailed Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.08355/) (2024)
- [How Robust is GPT-3.5 to Predecessors? A Comprehensive Study on Language Understanding Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.00293/) (2023)
- [Knowledge Mechanisms in Large Language Models: A Survey and Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.15017/) (2024)
- [RoTBench: A Multi-Level Benchmark for Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Models in Tool Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.08326/) (2024)
- [Learning or Self-aligning? Rethinking Instruction Fine-tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.18243/) (2024)
- [ToolEyes: Fine-Grained Evaluation for Tool Learning Capabilities of Large Language Models in Real-world Scenarios](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.00741/) (2024)
- [TOOLVERIFIER: Generalization to New Tools via Self-Verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14158/) (2024)
- [60 Data Points are Sufficient to Fine-Tune LLMs for Question-Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.15825/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [AgentGym-RL: Training LLM Agents for Long-Horizon Decision Making through Multi-Turn Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.08755/) (2025)
- [Feedback-Driven Tool-Use Improvements in Large Language Models via Automated Build Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.08791/) (2025)
- [MulDimIF: A Multi-Dimensional Constraint Framework for Evaluating and Improving Instruction Following in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.07591/) (2025)
- [Failure Makes the Agent Stronger: Enhancing Accuracy through Structured Reflection for Reliable Tool Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.18847/) (2025)
- [TTPA: Token-level Tool-use Preference Alignment Training Framework with Fine-grained Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.20016/) (2025)
- [iTool: Reinforced Fine-Tuning with Dynamic Deficiency Calibration for Advanced Tool Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.09766/) (2025)
- [Analyzing the Effects of Supervised Fine-Tuning on Model Knowledge from Token and Parameter Levels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.16596/) (2025)
- [When Simulation Lies: A Sim-to-Real Benchmark and Domain-Randomized RL Recipe for Tool-Use Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.11928/) (2026)
- [Beyond Fast and Slow: Cognitive-Inspired Elastic Reasoning for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.15089/) (2025)
- [DART-SD: Diamond-topology Aware Retrieval and Tuning for Self-Distillation of Multi-Turn Tool-Calling Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.18524/) (2026)
- [WebMCP Tool Surface Poisoning: Runtime Manipulation Attacks on LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.06387/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable advancements by leveraging tools to interact with environments, a critical step toward generalized AI. However, the standard supervised fine-tuning (SFT) approach, which relies on large-scale datasets, often overlooks task-specific characteristics in tool use, leading to performance bottlenecks. To address this issue, we analyze three existing LLMs and uncover key insights: training data can inadvertently impede tool-use behavior, token importance is distributed unevenly, and errors in tool calls fall into a small set of categories. Building on these findings, we propose~TL-Training, a task-feature-based framework that mitigates the effects of suboptimal training data, dynamically adjusts token weights to prioritize key tokens during SFT, and incorporates a robust reward mechanism tailored to error categories, optimized through proximal policy optimization. We validate TL-Training by training CodeLLaMA-2-7B and evaluating it on four open-source test sets. Our results demonstrate that the LLM trained by our method matches or surpasses both open- and closed-source LLMs in tool-use performance using only 1,217 training data points. Additionally, our method enhances robustness in noisy environments and improves general task performance, offering a scalable and efficient paradigm for tool-use training in LLMs. Code and data are available at https://github.com/Junjie-Ye/TL-Training.