# TextualRL: Textual Reinforcement Learning for Context Management

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.18216 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.18216/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reinforcement learning for reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 23 of its 27 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reinforcement learning for reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reinforcement-learning-for-reasoning/)
- LLM agents and tool use / [Reinforcement learning for LLM agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/reinforcement-learning-for-llm-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [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)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Voyager: An Open-Ended Embodied Agent with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.16291/) (2023)
- [DocVQA: A Dataset for VQA on Document Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.00398/) (2020)
- [ALFWorld: Aligning Text and Embodied Environments for Interactive Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03768/) (2020)
- [Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.01910/) (2022)
- [ExpeL: LLM Agents Are Experiential Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10144/) (2023)
- [Automatic Prompt Optimization with "Gradient Descent" and Beam Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03495/) (2023)
- [Language Agent Tree Search Unifies Reasoning Acting and Planning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.04406/) (2023)
- [GEPA: Reflective Prompt Evolution Can Outperform Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.19457/) (2025)
- [Agentic Context Engineering: Evolving Contexts for Self-Improving Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.04618/) (2025)
- [Optimizing Instructions and Demonstrations for Multi-Stage Language Model Programs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11695/) (2024)
- [ReasoningBank: Scaling Agent Self-Evolving with Reasoning Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.25140/) (2025)
- [SearchQA: A New Q&A Dataset Augmented with Context from a Search Engine](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.05179/) (2017)
- [Trace2Skill: Distill Trajectory-Local Lessons into Transferable Agent Skills](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.25158/) (2026)
- [Dynamic Cheatsheet: Test-Time Learning with Adaptive Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.07952/) (2025)
- [SkillOpt: Executive Strategy for Self-Evolving Agent Skills](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.23904/) (2026)
- [SpreadsheetBench: Towards Challenging Real World Spreadsheet Manipulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14991/) (2024)
- [EvoSkill: Automated Skill Discovery for Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.02766/) (2026)
- [OfficeQA Pro: An Enterprise Benchmark for End-to-End Grounded Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.08655/) (2026)
- [LiveMathematicianBench: A Live Benchmark for Research-Level Mathematical Reasoning with Proof Sketches](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.01754/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

LLM agents can adapt to task feedback by revising the textual context that guides their behavior, without changing their model parameters. However, turning execution rewards into reusable context updates is challenging: individual trajectories offer limited comparative evidence about what to change, while task-specific fixes may overgeneralize when incorporated into a shared context. We introduce TextualRL, a gradient-free reinforcement learning framework that treats a group of rollouts from the same task under the same context, rather than an isolated trajectory, as the unit of policy critique. Groupwise Policy Critique contrasts successful and failed rollouts within a task; when outcomes are uniform, it draws on cross-task evidence to identify behaviors worth preserving or formulate repair hypotheses. Cross-Group Policy Update reviews the resulting proposals against evidence pooled across groups, including observations that yield no proposed edit, to refine their content and applicability. Reviewed proposals form a bounded textual patch, with adoption of the candidate context determined by held-out validation rewards. Together, these components establish a reward-driven policy optimization loop in which multiple attempts jointly inform reusable context updates. We evaluate TextualRL with five target agents on six benchmarks. Averaged over the six benchmarks, TextualRL improves test accuracy over the base model by 24.4 and 15.3 percentage points for GPT-5.5 and Qwen3.8-27B, respectively.