Discoverable Agent Knowledge -- A Formal Framework for Agentic KG Affordances (Extended Version)
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
Abstract (arXiv)
Two decades ago, the Semantic Web Services community was asked how agents with different ontological commitments could discover, compose, and invoke web services coherently. The response was OWL-S and WSMO: formally grounded capability descriptions specifying what a service could do, what the agent must already know for invocation to be epistemically sound, and how ontological mismatches could be formally bridged. Current KG metadata standards such as VoID and DCAT describe what a KG contains, yet say nothing about what a specific agent can prove from it, what closure assumptions govern empty results, or whether the agent's task vocabulary is grounded in the schema. Furthermore, in deployed KGs the governing schema DL and the operative entailment regime can diverge: an epistemic failure mode invisible to current metadata. We revisit and extend these insights for the KG setting with a four-dimensional formal framework; Semantic Expressivity, Agentic Discoverability, Task-Relative Grounding, and Epistemic Trust Scope, from which we derive the Agentic Affordance Profile (AAP): a semantic layer above VoID and DCAT enabling principled KG selection, composition, and failure diagnosis at agent planning time. The four dimensions operationalise the affordance structure of the Ontological Continuum at the individual-agent level, specifically for kg selection, composition, and failure diagnosis. A worked example drawn from a scholarly-search task concretely grounds the framework, and identifies the formal, computational, and engineering work needed to realise AAP-based affordance matching at scale though a five-point research agenda.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 10 of its 70 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 May 2026.
Builds on
10 of 70 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Agentic AI: A Comprehensive Survey of Architectures, Applications, and Future Directions29 Oct
- 2025Large Language Models Miss the Multi-Agent Mark27 May
- 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents22 Aug
Other references · 7
- 2023Agent-OM: Leveraging LLM Agents for Ontology Matchingcited by 27
- 2022Governance of Autonomous Agents on the Web: Challenges and Opportunitiescited by 5
- 2023Signifiers as a First-class Abstraction in Hypermedia Multi-Agent Systemscited by 4
- 2025Fetch.ai: An Architecture for Modern Multi-Agent Systemscited by 4
- 2026The AnIML Ontology: Enabling Semantic Interoperability for Large-Scale Experimental Data in Interconnected Scientific Labscited by 3
- 2026Knowledge Affordances for Hybrid Human-AI Information Seekingcited by 2
- 2014Aber-OWL: a framework for ontology-based data access in biologycited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025From Multi-Agent Systems and the Semantic Web to Agentic AI: A Unified Narrative of the Web of Agents
- 2026Do Data Agents Need Semantic Metadata? A Comparative Study in Agentic Data Retrieval
- 2026Formal Semantics for Agentic Tool Protocols: A Process Calculus Approach
- 2026Beyond Message Passing: A Semantic View of Agent Communication Protocols
- 2026Provably Auditable and Safe LLM Agents from Human-Authored Ontologies
- 2026The Agentic Automation Canvas: a structured framework for agentic AI project design
- 2026A Contract-Centered Architecture for Scalable and Manageable Agentic Runtimes
- 2026Web Agents Should Use Typed Actions Instead of Click-Based Browsing