STT-Arena: A More Realistic Environment for Tool-Using with Spatio-Temporal Dynamics
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Tool learning and function calling
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) deployed in real-world agentic applications must be capable of replanning and adapting when mid-task disruptions invalidate their prior decisions. Existing dynamic benchmarks primarily measure whether LLMs can detect temporal changes in a timely manner, leaving the complementary challenge of adaptive replanning under spatio-temporal dynamics largely unexplored. We introduce STT-Arena (Spatio-Temporal Tool-Use Arena), a benchmark of 227 high-quality interactive tasks spanning nine spatio-temporal conflict types and four solvability levels. Each task is grounded in a realistic, executable environment equipped with injected spatio-temporal triggers that can abruptly invalidate an ongoing plan, forcing the model to detect the state shift and construct a revised execution strategy. Extensive evaluation of frontier LLMs reveals that even the SOTA proprietary models, including Claude-4.6-Opus, achieves less than 40% overall accuracies, highlighting the fundamental difficulty of spatio-temporal dynamic reasoning. Systematic analysis of failure trajectories uncovers three recurring error modes of existing models: Stale-State Execution, Misdiagnosis of Dynamic Triggers, and Missing Post-Adaptation Verification. Guided by these findings, we propose an iterative trajectory refinement technique that eliminates these failure patterns from training data, and combine it with online RL to produce STT-Agent-4B which outperforms frontier LLMs on STT-Arena.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Tool learning and function calling, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. First posted on arXiv 18 May 2026.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026When Tools Fail: Benchmarking Dynamic Replanning and Anomaly Recovery in LLM Agentscited by 15
- 2026UniACE: A Unified Framework for Evaluating LLM Agentic Capabilitiescited by 4
- 2026Stale Does Not Mean Unsafe: Guard Precision for Tool-Using LLM Agents under Infrastructure State Racescited by 0
- 2026Commitment Hierarchies under Intent Revision: A Belief-Revision Account of Salvage in Tool-Use Agentscited by 0
- 2026Commitment Hierarchies under Intent Revision: A Belief-Revision Account of Salvage in Tool-Use Agents28 Sep 2026
- 2026Stale Does Not Mean Unsafe: Guard Precision for Tool-Using LLM Agents under Infrastructure State Races25 Aug 2026
- 2026When Tools Fail: Benchmarking Dynamic Replanning and Anomaly Recovery in LLM Agents4 Jun 2026
- 2026UniACE: A Unified Framework for Evaluating LLM Agentic Capabilities27 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025TRAJECT-Bench:A Trajectory-Aware Benchmark for Evaluating Agentic Tool Use
- 2025USTBench: Benchmarking and Dissecting Spatiotemporal Reasoning of LLMs as Urban Agents
- 2026What Do Agents Learn from Trajectory-SFT: Semantics or Interfaces?
- 2026STAR: Failure-Aware Markovian Routing for Multi-Agent Spatiotemporal Reasoning
- 2023Can Large Language Models be Good Path Planners? A Benchmark and Investigation on Spatial-temporal Reasoning
- 2026Action-Space Shaping for LLM Agents: Measuring and Mitigating Tool-Schema Bias
- 2026AgentProcessBench: Diagnosing Step-Level Process Quality in Tool-Using Agents
- 2025On the Limits of Innate Planning in Large Language Models