Retry, Switch, or Abstain? Learning Strategy-Aware Tool-Use Policies via Controlled Error Injection
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Tool learning and function calling
Abstract (arXiv)
Tool-using LLM agents are typically developed and post-trained in controlled environments with reliable tools, but deployment exposes them to tool failures, API and schema drift, and third-party services outside the developer's control. We introduce Bench2Robust, a framework for scenario-controlled solvability that augments existing benchmarks with episodes requiring retrying the original path, switching to a fallback-equivalent tool, or recognizing that no viable path remains. By controlling recoverability, Bench2Robust separates recovery-policy quality from randomness in whether failures persist or resolve. Across 7 models from 4 families and 10 task/domain slices spanning customer-service and function-calling benchmarks, 69 of 70 model-subset pairs degrade under tool failures, by up to 46.7 percentage points. We propose Bayesian Tool Memory (BTM) for structured runtime recovery context and use reinforcement learning (RL) for learned recovery behavior. On held-out Retail tasks using the benchmark's original tool set, BTM improves robustness by 16.8 percentage points without retraining, while RL retains a 6.3-point gain without inference-time BTM. Combining RL with BTM yields a 20.7-point improvement over the base model while preserving clean performance. These results show that robust tool use benefits from combining structured runtime recovery context with learned recovery behavior.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Tool learning and function calling, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 27 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Aug 2026.
Builds on
27 of 31 references.
Closest ancestors · 12
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Beyond Function Calling: Benchmarking Tool-Using Agents under Tool-Environment Unreliability24 Jun
- 2026PlanBench-XL: Evaluating Long-Horizon Planning of LLM Tool-Use Agents in Large-Scale Tool Ecosystems21 Jun
- 2026When Tools Fail: Benchmarking Dynamic Replanning and Anomaly Recovery in LLM Agents4 Jun
- 2026Trajectory2Task: Training Robust Tool-Calling Agents with Synthesized Yet Verifiable Data for Complex User Intents28 Jan
- 2026Beyond Perfect APIs: A Comprehensive Evaluation of LLM Agents Under Real-World API Complexity1 Jan
- 2025ToolCritic: Detecting and Correcting Tool-Use Errors in Dialogue Systems19 Oct
- 2025PALADIN: Self-Correcting Language Model Agents to Cure Tool-Failure Cases25 Sep
- 2024Learning to Ask: When LLM Agents Meet Unclear Instruction31 Aug
- 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs31 Jul
- 2023Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIs24 May
- 2023API-Bank: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Tool-Augmented LLMs14 Apr
- 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools9 Feb
Other references · 15
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,379
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2025DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scalecited by 2,810
- 2017Domain Randomization for Transferring Deep Neural Networks from Simulation to the Real Worldcited by 1,498
- 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,402
- 2023Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yetcited by 1,017
- 2025τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environmentcited by 627
- 2023Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandboxcited by 548
- 2023R-Tuning: Instructing Large Language Models to Say `I Don't Know'cited by 111
- 2026ReliabilityBench: Evaluating LLM Agent Reliability Under Production-Like Stress Conditionscited by 36
- 2026AgentNoiseBench: Benchmarking Robustness of Tool-Using LLM Agents Under Noisy Conditioncited by 23
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Robust Tool Use via Fission-GRPO: Learning to Recover from Execution Errors
- 2025Failure Makes the Agent Stronger: Enhancing Accuracy through Structured Reflection for Reliable Tool Interactions
- 2026FAR: Failure-Aware Retry for Test-Time Recovery and Continual Policy Improvement
- 2026Recoverability Has a Law: The ERR Measure for Tool-Augmented Agents
- 2026Sentry: Learning to Recover from LLM Agent Failures at Test Time
- 2026ParaRecover: A Process-Level Benchmark for Error Localization and Recovery in Parallel Tool-Use Agents
- 2026ReGRPO: Reflection-Augmented Policy Optimization for Tool-Using Agents
- 2026Synthesize and Reward -- Reinforcement Learning for Multi-Step Tool Use in Live Environments