REVIEW 4 cited by
NESTFUL: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs on Nested Sequences of API Calls
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
The resurgence of autonomous agents built using large language models (LLMs) to solve complex real-world tasks has brought increased focus on LLMs' fundamental ability of tool or function calling. At the core of these agents, an LLM must plan, execute, and respond using external tools, APIs, and custom functions. Research on tool calling has gathered momentum, but evaluation benchmarks and datasets representing the complexity of the tasks have lagged behind. In this work, we focus on one such complexity, nested sequencing, with the goal of extending existing benchmarks and evaluation. Specifically, we present NESTFUL, a benchmark to evaluate LLMs on nested sequences of API calls, i.e., sequences where the output of one API call is passed as input to a subsequent call. NESTFUL contains 1800+ nested sequences where all the function calls are executable. Experimental results on a variety of models show that the best-performing model (GPT-4o) achieves a full sequence match accuracy of 28% and a win-rate of 60%, necessitating a large scope for improvement in the nested sequencing aspect of function calling. Our analysis of these results provides possible future research directions for the community, in addition to a benchmark to track progress. We have released the NESTFUL dataset under the Apache 2.0 license at https://github.com/IBM/NESTFUL.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
RAG Strategies for Natural Language-Based SQL Query and REST API Call Generation
In a 631-case enterprise benchmark, iterative retrieval (CoRAG) achieved 10.29% exact match vs 7.45% for standard RAG on combined SQL/API generation with hybrid documentation, while no-RAG gives 0% exact match.
-
How Can Input Reformulation Improve Tool Usage Accuracy in a Complex Dynamic Environment? A Study on $\tau$-bench
IRMA reformulates tool-agent inputs with memory, domain constraints, and tool suggestions, and reports improved tau-bench pass^5 reliability over ReAct, function calling, and self-reflection.
-
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...
-
LLM-based Agentic Reasoning Frameworks: A Survey from Methods to Scenarios
A survey that classifies LLM-based agent reasoning frameworks into single-agent, tool-based, and multi-agent types and reviews their use across scientific, medical, software, and social domains.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.