mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AgentSHAP: Interpreting LLM Agent Tool Importance with Monte Carlo Shapley Value Estimation

arXiv 2512.12597 ↗First posted 14 Dec 2025cs.AI cs.CLcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Tool learning and function calling

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM agents that use external tools can solve complex tasks, but understanding which tools actually contributed to a response remains a blind spot. No existing XAI methods address tool-level explanations. We introduce AgentSHAP, the first framework for explaining tool importance in LLM agents. AgentSHAP is model-agnostic: it treats the agent as a black box and works with any LLM (GPT, Claude, Llama, etc.) without needing access to internal weights or gradients. Using Monte Carlo Shapley values, AgentSHAP tests how an agent responds with different tool subsets and computes fair importance scores based on game theory. Our contributions are: (1) the first explainability method for agent tool attribution, grounded in Shapley values from game theory; (2) Monte Carlo sampling that reduces cost from O(2n) to practical levels; and (3) comprehensive experiments on API-Bank showing that AgentSHAP produces consistent scores across runs, correctly identifies which tools matter, and distinguishes relevant from irrelevant tools. AgentSHAP joins TokenSHAP (for tokens) and PixelSHAP (for image regions) to complete a family of Shapley-based XAI tools for modern generative AI. Code: https://github.com/GenAISHAP/TokenSHAP.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Tool learning and function calling, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 14 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Dec 2025.

Builds on

14 of 21 references.

Closest ancestors · 4

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs31 Jul
  2. 2023Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIs24 May
  3. 2023Tool Learning with Foundation Models17 Apr
  4. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools9 Feb

Other references · 10

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  3. 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
  4. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
  5. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,242
  6. 2023The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Surveycited by 1,439
  7. 2023HuggingGPT: Solving AI Tasks with ChatGPT and its Friends in Hugging Facecited by 1,190
  8. 2019Analyzing the Structure of Attention in a Transformer Language Modelcited by 243
  9. 2024TokenSHAP: Interpreting Large Language Models with Monte Carlo Shapley Value Estimationcited by 42
  10. 2025Attention, Please! PixelSHAP Reveals What Vision-Language Models Actually Focus Oncited by 9

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026SkillShapley: Boundary-Adaptive Shapley Valuation for Skill Step Attribution in LLM Agents
  2. 2026AgentEscapeBench: Evaluating Out-of-Domain Tool-Grounded Reasoning in LLM Agents
  3. 2026Beyond Static Leaderboards: Predictive Validity for the Evaluation of LLM Agents
  4. 2026AgentTune: A Unified Training Lifecycle for Tool-Using LLM Agents
  5. 2026BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructure
  6. 2026A Framework for Evaluating Agentic Skills at Scale
  7. 2026ToolPRMBench: Evaluating and Advancing Process Reward Models for Tool-using Agents
  8. 2026Diagnosing Tool-Selection Reasoning in LLM Agents with Canary Tools