# Agentic Context Learning with Self-Discovered Specification

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.09794 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.09794/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agent memory systems, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 28 of its 47 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 Jul 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent memory systems](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-memory-systems/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 28 of 28)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.10997/) (2023)
- [Self-RAG: Learning to Retrieve, Generate, and Critique through Self-Reflection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11511/) (2023)
- [From Local to Global: A Graph RAG Approach to Query-Focused Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.16130/) (2024)
- [LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.14508/) (2023)
- [MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08560/) (2023)
- [RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.06654/) (2024)
- [Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.07911/) (2023)
- [OpenAI GPT-5 System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.03267/) (2025)
- [DSPy: Compiling Declarative Language Model Calls into Self-Improving Pipelines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03714/) (2023)
- [RAPTOR: Recursive Abstractive Processing for Tree-Organized Retrieval](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.18059/) (2024)
- [Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.05802/) (2022)
- [Is ChatGPT Good at Search? Investigating Large Language Models as Re-Ranking Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.09542/) (2023)
- [Corrective Retrieval Augmented Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.15884/) (2024)
- [FOFO: A Benchmark to Evaluate LLMs' Format-Following Capability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.18667/) (2024)
- [TICKing All the Boxes: Generated Checklists Improve LLM Evaluation and Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.03608/) (2024)
- [Inference Scaling for Long-Context Retrieval Augmented Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.04343/) (2024)
- [Agentic Rubrics as Contextual Verifiers for SWE Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.04171/) (2026)
- [Inference-Time Scaling of Verification: Self-Evolving Deep Research Agents via Test-Time Rubric-Guided Verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.15808/) (2026)
- [Guideline Forest: Retrieval-Augmented Reasoning with Branching Experience-Induced Guidelines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.07820/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Ignorance or Incompetence? Constructing Knowledge-Gated, Verifiable Tasks for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.30322/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Context learning is an emerging inference-time task where LLMs must learn and apply novel, task-specific knowledge from intricate contexts absent from pre-training; even frontier models score under 24% task success. In this work, we conduct a comprehensive empirical study to understand why this setting remains difficult. A natural hypothesis is that failures stem from content access; yet across twelve retrieval, reflection, and verification baselines on CL-Bench, an extensive context learning benchmark, we find limited gains over direct full-context prompting. Further failure analysis reveals a key finding: unlike typical long-context tasks such as long document understanding, context learning requires not only recovering local content but also acquiring local specifications that are often unspecified in the query but distributed across the context: domain-specific formats, local rules, and completeness conditions. Across all 31,592 rubric items, we find that 55.4% clearly evaluate specification acquisition, while only 22.6% evaluate content acquisition. Moreover, despite 76.7% of specifications being unspecified in the user query, 95.5% are traceable to the context, indicating these are learnable obligations rather than hidden requirements. To validate this diagnosis, we design a deliberately simple intervention PSCI (private specification-contract induction) which extracts local specifications and enforces them through adversarial checking and repair; PSCI achieves state-of-the-art 28.14% with GPT-5.1 (+5.59 pp absolute and +24.8% relative) on CL-Bench, replicated on Qwen3.5-27B (+5.28 pp) and Gemini 3 Pro (+6.17 pp). Seventeen ablations further isolate the role of task-specific specifications. Overall, our results suggest context learning hinges on not only content acquisition but also specification acquisition.