mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

GIST-CMTF: Goal-State Inference for Causal Minimal Tool Filtering in LLM Agents

arXiv 2606.16813 ↗First posted 15 Jun 2026cs.AIcited by 2

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Tool-augmented LLM agents rely on runtime filtering to decide which tools should be visible at each step. Causal Minimal Tool Filtering (CMTF) reduces tool-choice confusion by exposing only the next causally necessary tool frontier, but it assumes that the user request has already been mapped to a symbolic goal state. In practice, requests such as "handle my appointment" or "take care of this email" may correspond to multiple possible goals. This creates wrong-goal execution, where an agent follows a valid causal tool path for an unintended objective. We introduce GIST-CMTF, a goal-state inference layer that predicts candidate symbolic goals over the same state-transition vocabulary used by CMTF, estimates ambiguity, and either applies CMTF or exposes clarification as a causal action that produces missing goal or state variables. We evaluate GIST-CMTF across seven model backends, six filtering methods, and 120 controlled tool-use tasks. GIST-CMTF achieves 97.0% task success, compared with 80.1% for top-goal CMTF and 82.9% for semantic-goal CMTF. It reduces wrong-goal execution from 19.4% under top-goal CMTF to 2.5%, while preserving the one-tool exposure of causal filtering and using substantially fewer tokens than all-tools exposure. These results suggest that reliable tool-augmented agents should validate goal state, not only tool relevance, before exposing external actions.

Key facts. Cited by 2 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. Builds on 8 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jun 2026.

Builds on

8 of 11 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026ToolChoiceConfusion: Causal Minimal Tool Filtering for Reliable LLM Agents4 Jun
  2. 2026Self-Healing Agentic Orchestrators for Reliable Tool-Augmented Large Language Model Systems31 May
  3. 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs31 Jul
  4. 2023API-Bank: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Tool-Augmented LLMs14 Apr
  5. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools9 Feb

Other references · 3

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
  2. 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agentscited by 1,211
  3. 2026Capability Minimization as a Safety Primitive: Risk-Aware Causal Gating for Least-Privilege LLM Agentscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026ToolMenuBench: Benchmarking Tool-Menu Filtering Strategies for Reliable and Efficient LLM Agents
  2. 2026Are Tools All We Need? Unveiling the Tool-Use Tax in LLM Agents
  3. 2026Contract2Tool: Learning Preconditions and Effects for Reliable Tool-Augmented LLM Agents
  4. 2026When Does Memory Help Multi-Trajectory Inference for Tool-Use LLM Agents?
  5. 2026LLM Agents Are Latent Context Managers: Eliciting Self-Managed Context via State Proprioception
  6. 2024StateAct: Enhancing LLM Base Agents via Self-prompting and State-tracking
  7. 2026AgentSentry: Mitigating Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents via Temporal Causal Diagnostics and Context Purification
  8. 2026Action-Space Shaping for LLM Agents: Measuring and Mitigating Tool-Schema Bias