REVIEW 4 cited by
From Exploration to Mastery: Enabling LLMs to Master Tools via Self-Driven Interactions
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Tool learning enables Large Language Models (LLMs) to interact with external environments by invoking tools, serving as an effective strategy to mitigate the limitations inherent in their pre-training data. In this process, tool documentation plays a crucial role by providing usage instructions for LLMs, thereby facilitating effective tool utilization. This paper concentrates on the critical challenge of bridging the comprehension gap between LLMs and external tools due to the inadequacies and inaccuracies inherent in existing human-centric tool documentation. We propose a novel framework, DRAFT, aimed at Dynamically Refining tool documentation through the Analysis of Feedback and Trials emanating from LLMs' interactions with external tools. This methodology pivots on an innovative trial-and-error approach, consisting of three distinct learning phases: experience gathering, learning from experience, and documentation rewriting, to iteratively enhance the tool documentation. This process is further optimized by implementing a diversity-promoting exploration strategy to ensure explorative diversity and a tool-adaptive termination mechanism to prevent overfitting while enhancing efficiency. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets demonstrate that DRAFT's iterative, feedback-based refinement significantly ameliorates documentation quality, fostering a deeper comprehension and more effective utilization of tools by LLMs. Notably, our analysis reveals that the tool documentation refined via our approach demonstrates robust cross-model generalization capabilities.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Beyond the Final Answer: Evaluating the Reasoning Trajectories of Tool-Augmented Agents
TRACE uses an evidence bank to score tool-augmented LLM agents on efficiency, hallucination, and adaptivity without ground-truth trajectories.
-
MLA-Trust: Benchmarking Trustworthiness of Multimodal LLM Agents in GUI Environments
MLA-Trust introduces 34 tasks and an evaluation toolbox showing that GUI-interacting multimodal agents are substantially less trustworthy than static multimodal chat models.
-
CRITICTOOL: Evaluating Self-Critique Capabilities of Large Language Models in Tool-Calling Error Scenarios
CRITICTOOL, a benchmark of 2,740 tool-calling error scenarios built from BFCL and T-Eval with GPT-4o-based error injection, finds most LLMs rarely recover from tool-use errors, with GPT-4o best at 69.01 overall and to...
-
A Survey on Autonomy-Induced Security Risks in Large Model-Based Agents
The paper surveys security risks of LLM agents, organizes them into a five-level autonomy taxonomy, and proposes an untested CMDP-based architecture called R2A2.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.