# Evaluating LLMs as Agentic Workflow Executors in Real-World Customer Support Skills

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.14346 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.14346/

## 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 15 of its 27 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 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, 15 of 15)

- [Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06180/) (2023)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.01652/) (2021)
- [Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10560/) (2022)
- [ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16789/) (2023)
- [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)
- [τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.07982/) (2025)
- [API-Bank: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Tool-Augmented LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08244/) (2023)
- [ToolSandbox: A Stateful, Conversational, Interactive Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Tool Use Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.04682/) (2024)
- [Tiny Titans: Can Smaller Large Language Models Punch Above Their Weight in the Real World for Meeting Summarization?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.00841/) (2024)
- [SkillOrchestra: Learning to Route Agents via Skill Transfer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.19672/) (2026)
- [CONFETTI: Conversational Function-Calling Evaluation Through Turn-Level Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.01859/) (2025)
- [A Survey on LLM-based Conversational User Simulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.24977/) (2026)
- [AI Knowledge Assist: An Automated Approach for the Creation of Knowledge Bases for Conversational AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.08149/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Enterprise customer-support agents increasingly rely on Large Language Models (LLMs) to execute bounded, tool-using workflows. We study this problem through the lens of Skill LLMs: specialized executors that operate within a selected skill context and must complete a narrow, stateful workflow under policy and tool constraints. We present a benchmark construction pipeline that mines recurrent workflows from real-world transcripts, converts them into structured skill descriptions, maps them to tool requirements, simulates environment state with Model Context Protocol (MCP)-compatible mocks, and generates multi-turn tool-using dialogues. Using this benchmark, we conduct a large-scale zero-shot evaluation of 17 language models spanning closed model families and deployment-oriented open-weight models from 1.7B to 14B parameters, each judged independently by five strong LLM judges, plus a deterministic rule-based evaluator that checks tool coverage, hallucinated tool use, and unsupported claims. We find a consistent ranking in which GPT-5.4 leads by a wide margin and QWEN3.5-9B is the strongest open-weight model (below 20B), outperforming several closed baselines under every judge. We also find that judge choice is not a negligible methodological detail: pairwise judge agreement on the pass/fail verdict averages Kappa=0.524 across 10 judge pairs. These results suggest that comprehensive zero-shot evaluation of skill execution requires judge reliability as carefully as model capability.