Agentic Tool Use in Large Language Models
arXiv:2604.00835v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly being deployed as autonomous agents yet their real world effectiveness depends on reliable tools for information retrieval, computation and external action. Existing studies remain fragmented across tasks, tool types, and training settings, lacking a unified view of how tool-use methods differ and evolve. This paper organizes the literature into three paradigms: prompting as plug-and-play, supervised tool learning and reward-driven tool policy learning, analyzes their methods, strengths and failure modes, re — Jinchao Hu (Harbin Institute of Technology Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China), Meizhi Zhong (TikTok Inc, Beijing, China), Kehai Chen (Harbin Institute of Technology Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China), Xuefeng Bai (Harbin Institute of Technology Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China), Min Zhang (Harbin Institute of Technology Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China)
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Large language models are increasingly being deployed as autonomous agents yet their real world effectiveness depends on reliable tools for information retrieval, computation and external action. Existing studies remain fragmented across tasks, tool types, and training settings, lacking a unified view of how tool-use methods differ and evolve. This paper organizes the literature into three paradigms: prompting as plug-and-play, supervised tool learning and reward-driven tool policy learning, analyzes their methods, strengths and failure modes, reviews the evaluation landscape and highlights key challenges, aiming to address this fragmentation and provide a more structured evolutionary view of agentic tool use.
Subjects:
Computation and Language (cs.CL)
Cite as: arXiv:2604.00835 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2604.00835v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.00835
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Submission history
From: Jinchao Hu [view email] [v1] Wed, 1 Apr 2026 12:46:51 UTC (976 KB)
Sign in to highlight and annotate this article
Conversation starters
Daily AI Digest
Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
More about
researchpaperarxiv
National Robotics Week — Latest Physical AI Research, Breakthroughs and Resources
This National Robotics Week, NVIDIA is highlighting the breakthroughs that are bringing AI into the physical world — as well as the growing wave of robots transforming industries, from agricultural and manufacturing to energy and beyond. Advancements in robot learning, simulation and foundation models are accelerating development, enabling robots to move from training in virtual [ ]
Knowledge Map
Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph
This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.
More in Research Papers
New Rowhammer attack can grant kernel-level control on Nvidia workstation GPUs
A study from researchers at UNC Chapel Hill and Georgia Tech shows that GDDR6-based Rowhammer attacks can grant kernel-level access to Linux systems equipped with GPUs based on Nvidia's Ampere and Ada Lovelace architectures. The vulnerability appears significantly more severe than what was outlined in a paper last year. Read Entire Article
![[D] ICML Reviewer Acknowledgement](https://d2xsxph8kpxj0f.cloudfront.net/310419663032563854/konzwo8nGf8Z4uZsMefwMr/default-img-matrix-rain-CvjLrWJiXfamUnvj5xT9J9.webp)
[D] ICML Reviewer Acknowledgement
Hi, I'm a little confused about ICML discussion period Does the period for reviewer acknowledging responses have already ended? One of the four reviewers did not present any answer to a paper of mine. Do you know if the reviewer can still change their score before April 7th? There is a reviewer comment that I will answer on Monday. Will the reviewer be able to update the score after seeing my answer? Thanks! submitted by /u/Massive_Horror9038 [link] [comments]
Considerations for growing the pie
Recently some friends and I were comparing growing the pie interventions to an increasing our friends' share of the pie intervention, and at first we mostly missed some general considerations against the latter type. 1. Decision-theoretic considerations The world is full of people with different values working towards their own ends; each of them can choose to use their resources to increase the total size of the pie or to increase their share of the pie. All of them would significantly prefer a world in which resources were used to increase the size of the pie, and this leads to a number [of] compelling justifications for each individual to cooperate. . . . by increasing the size of the pie we create a world which is better for people on average, and from behind the veil of ignorance we s
Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!