AgentAsk: Multi-Agent Systems Need to Ask
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
Abstract (arXiv)
Multi-agent systems (MAS) built on large language models promise improved problem-solving through collaboration, yet they often fail to consistently outperform strong single-agent baselines due to error propagation at inter-agent message handoffs.In this work, we conduct a systematic empirical analysis of such failures and introduce an edge-level error taxonomy that identifies four dominant error types: Data Gap, Signal Corruption, Referential Drift, and Capability Gap, as primary sources of failure in multi-agent interactions. Building on this taxonomy, we propose AgentAsk, a lightweight clarification module designed to intervene at the edge level in MAS to prevent cascading errors. The module operates by strategically applying minimal clarifications at critical points within the system, improving the accuracy and efficiency of the overall task. AgentAsk is trained to balance the trade-offs between clarification cost, latency, and accuracy, while it is also architecture-agnostic and can be easily integrated into existing systems. Evaluated across five benchmarks, AgentAsk consistently improves accuracy by up to 4.69%, while keeping latency and extra costs below 10% compared to baseline MAS, showcasing its high efficiency and minimal overhead.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 20 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Oct 2025.
Builds on
20 of 43 references.
Closest ancestors · 4
Same direction, newest first
- 2025MultiAgentBench: Evaluating the Collaboration and Competition of LLM agents3 Mar
- 2025Multi-agent Architecture Search via Agentic Supernet6 Feb
- 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debate14 Aug
- 2023CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model Society31 Mar
Other references · 16
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
- 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,072
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
- 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
- 2023Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 995
- 2023ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Developmentcited by 893
- 2023FrugalGPT: How to Use Large Language Models While Reducing Cost and Improving Performancecited by 791
- 2023ChemCrow: Augmenting large-language models with chemistry toolscited by 609
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 559
4 more
- 2024Modeling Future Conversation Turns to Teach LLMs to Ask Clarifying Questionscited by 70
- 2025Talk Isn't Always Cheap: Understanding Failure Modes in Multi-Agent Debatecited by 63
- 2024Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Key Condition Verificationcited by 39
- 2025ReVISE: Learning to Refine at Test-Time via Intrinsic Self-Verificationcited by 35
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 6.
6 papers.
- 2026Beyond Individual Intelligence: Surveying Collaboration, Failure Attribution, and Self-Evolution in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systemscited by 5
- 2026Evolve as a Team: Collaborative Self-Evolution for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systemscited by 2
- 2026Structure for Reading, Prose for Writing: Asymmetric Structural Conditioning in Multi-Agent Document Authoringcited by 0
- 2026The Decomposition Tax: LLM Pipelines Lose Up to 40 Accuracy Points at Their Own Interfacescited by 0
- 2026Prospective Interpretation Risk: Principled Communication Control Between LLMscited by 0
- 2026Can Generative AI Automate Data Extraction for Meta-Analysis? A Case Study on Intercropping Researchcited by 0
- 2026Can Generative AI Automate Data Extraction for Meta-Analysis? A Case Study on Intercropping Research28 Sep 2026
- 2026Prospective Interpretation Risk: Principled Communication Control Between LLMs27 Sep 2026
- 2026The Decomposition Tax: LLM Pipelines Lose Up to 40 Accuracy Points at Their Own Interfaces26 Sep 2026
- 2026Structure for Reading, Prose for Writing: Asymmetric Structural Conditioning in Multi-Agent Document Authoring21 Aug 2026
- 2026Evolve as a Team: Collaborative Self-Evolution for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems28 May 2026
- 2026Beyond Individual Intelligence: Surveying Collaboration, Failure Attribution, and Self-Evolution in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems14 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026AgentNoiseBench: Benchmarking Robustness of Tool-Using LLM Agents Under Noisy Condition
- 2026Towards Self-Improving Error Diagnosis in Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026Rethinking the Evaluation of Efficiency Methods for Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026Decentralized Multi-Agent Systems with Shared Context
- 2025CORRECT: COndensed eRror RECognition via knowledge Transfer in multi-agent systems
- 2025AgentsNet: Coordination and Collaborative Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLMs
- 2024AgentScope: A Flexible yet Robust Multi-Agent Platform
- 2026MAS-FIRE: Fault Injection and Reliability Evaluation for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems