# Choosing Before Acting: Comparative Value Estimation for Long-Horizon Tool-Use Agents

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.02330 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.02330/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Tool learning and function calling, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 54 of its 57 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 1 Oct 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Tool learning and function calling](https://mlsanity.com/agents/tool-learning-and-function-calling/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 54)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13854/) (2023)
- [ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16789/) (2023)
- [WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.09332/) (2021)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12045/) (2024)
- [Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15334/) (2023)
- [AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03688/) (2023)
- [Qwen2.5-Coder Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12186/) (2024)
- [Counterfactual Multi-Agent Policy Gradients](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.08926/) (2017)
- [PAL: Program-aided Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.10435/) (2022)
- [API-Bank: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Tool-Augmented LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08244/) (2023)
- [Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06592/) (2024)
- [AppWorld: A Controllable World of Apps and People for Benchmarking Interactive Coding Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.18901/) (2024)
- [ReTool: Reinforcement Learning for Strategic Tool Use in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.11536/) (2025)
- [ToolRL: Reward is All Tool Learning Needs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.13958/) (2025)
- [Judging the Judges: A Systematic Study of Position Bias in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.07791/) (2024)
- [ReWOO: Decoupling Reasoning from Observations for Efficient Augmented Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18323/) (2023)
- [Is Your LLM Secretly a World Model of the Internet? Model-Based Planning for Web Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.06559/) (2024)
- [RestGPT: Connecting Large Language Models with Real-World RESTful APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.06624/) (2023)
- [StableToolBench: Towards Stable Large-Scale Benchmarking on Tool Learning of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07714/) (2024)
- [ToolChain*: Efficient Action Space Navigation in Large Language Models with A* Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13227/) (2023)
- [Watch Every Step! LLM Agent Learning via Iterative Step-Level Process Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11176/) (2024)
- [Process Reward Models for LLM Agents: Practical Framework and Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.10325/) (2025)
- [The Tool Decathlon: Benchmarking Language Agents for Diverse, Realistic, and Long-Horizon Task Execution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.25726/) (2025)
- [AgentPRM: Process Reward Models for LLM Agents via Step-Wise Promise and Progress](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.08325/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) rely on long-horizon tool invocation sequences for complex tasks, where each invocation can alter the task state and condition subsequent decisions. In long-horizon tool use, final-outcome rewards provide weak credit assignment over long interaction traces. Step-level rewards can offer more targeted feedback, but obtaining reliable step supervision often requires human or LLM judgment, or additional rollouts to estimate the downstream effect of an intermediate decision. In this paper, we argue that effective tool-use agents should estimate the long-horizon value of a possible next tool invocation before executing it. This objective requires comparative supervision over alternative invocations under the same context, while logged trajectories only contain the invocation that was actually taken. Therefore, we propose Comparative Inference for Tool-use Agents (CITA). CITA trains a Comparative Inference Model (CIM) from paired signals that combine observed tool behavior, scalable supervision from a Bayesian tool-graph simulator, and semantic judgments from LLM-based comparison. The resulting CIM learns to estimate how likely a possible next tool invocation is to support final task success under the current context. Across three tool-use benchmarks and multiple backbone LLMs, CITA consistently improves Tool F1 and task success. Additional analysis shows that CIM learns accurate step-level value estimates for comparative tool choices.