Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

ToolEyes: Fine-Grained Evaluation for Tool Learning Capabilities of Large Language Models in Real-world Scenarios

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

arxiv 2401.00741 v3 pith:ZSSPAYVH submitted 2024-01-01 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords toollearningllmsscenariostooleyescapabilitiestoolsalignment
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Existing evaluations of tool learning primarily focus on validating the alignment of selected tools for large language models (LLMs) with expected outcomes. However, these approaches rely on a limited set of scenarios where answers can be pre-determined, diverging from genuine needs. Furthermore, a sole emphasis on outcomes disregards the complex capabilities required for LLMs to effectively use tools. To tackle this issue, we propose ToolEyes, a fine-grained system tailored for the evaluation of the LLMs' tool learning capabilities in authentic scenarios. The system meticulously examines seven real-world scenarios, analyzing five dimensions crucial to LLMs in tool learning: format alignment, intent comprehension, behavior planning, tool selection, and answer organization. Additionally, ToolEyes incorporates a tool library boasting approximately 600 tools, serving as an intermediary between LLMs and the physical world. Evaluations involving ten LLMs across three categories reveal a preference for specific scenarios and limited cognitive abilities in tool learning. Intriguingly, expanding the model size even exacerbates the hindrance to tool learning. The code and data are available at https://github.com/Junjie-Ye/ToolEyes.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. DICE-BENCH: Evaluating the Tool-Use Capabilities of Large Language Models in Multi-Round, Multi-Party Dialogues

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A new benchmark and metric show that large language models still struggle to call tools when the needed details are scattered across multi-party, multi-round group dialogues.

  2. Butterfly Effects in Toolchains: A Comprehensive Analysis of Failed Parameter Filling in LLM Tool-Agent Systems

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLM tool agents fail at parameter filling in five recurring ways; perturbing tool documents and user queries drives most failures, and invented parameter names are tied to the model rather than the input.

  3. RepoMaster: Autonomous Exploration and Understanding of GitHub Repositories for Complex Task Solving

    cs.SE 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RepoMaster, a repository-aware code agent, lifts the task pass rate from 40.7% to 62.9% and cuts token use by about 95% versus OpenHands on the new GitTaskBench benchmark.

  4. Hephaestus: Improving Fundamental Agent Capabilities of Large Language Models through Continual Pre-Training

    cs.CL 2025-02 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    Continual pre-training on a large agent-focused corpus of API docs and tool trajectories improves an 8B LLM's function-calling and planning, but the reported generalization is undermined by benchmark data appearing in...

  5. CRITICTOOL: Evaluating Self-Critique Capabilities of Large Language Models in Tool-Calling Error Scenarios

    cs.SE 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    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...

Pith tools