Agents' Last Doubt: Knowing When to Act and When to Step Back in Tool-Using Agents
arXiv cs.AIen
arXiv cs.AI
AI Global WirearXiv:2610.24194v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using LLM agents repeatedly face decision points under uncertainty, choosing between autonomous action, additional information gathering, and human escalation. These decisions require balancing task success against interaction cost and the risk of irreversible errors. Learning to make these trade-offs is challenging because existing interaction trajectories record only the outcomes of actions taken, leaving the consequences of alternative actions unobserved. To address this gap, we construct a counterfactual dataset containing 3,115 action outcomes from 1,036 decision points in ToolSandbox. At each decision point, we execute each legal act
This is a short summary published by AI Global Wire. The full article is owned and hosted by arXiv cs.AI — open it there to read it in full.
Read the full story at arXiv cs.AI- Verktyg
- Forskning
- Agenter
Related AI news
- Leaked documents detail ECHOTRIBBLE, a nascent US Army Cyber Command program for agentic AI to autonomously spread across networks to find and eliminate targets (Sam Biddle/The Intercept)Techmeme · October 20, 2026
- Norske bedrifter får stadig kortere tid til å reageredigi.no · October 20, 2026
- On a testé Instinct, l’agent IA grand public qui entend concurrencer ceux d’OpenAI et de MetaLe Monde Pixels · October 20, 2026
- Nvidia says South Korea has Vera CPU customers, LG robot results aheadDIGITIMES · October 20, 2026
- Ex-DeepMind researcher Thore Graepel launches new startup Metis ReasoningSifted · October 20, 2026
- Beyond Explicit Intent: Discovering and Shaping Artistic Intent through Human-AI Co-CreationarXiv cs.AI · October 20, 2026