aiqbench analysis
This study investigates the reliability of skill transfer in LLM agents, revealing that subtask-level induction and text-based formats generally outperform task-level and code-based approaches. The authors introduce a practical "skill utility score" to diagnose memory effectiveness without executing tasks, offering a critical diagnostic tool for building robust autonomous agents. This research directly addresses core challenges in scaling agent capabilities through reliable experience accumulation.
Break It Down, Pass It On: Cross-Task Skill Transfer in LLM Agents
arXiv:2608.20274v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents can induce skills from completed tasks and reuse them later to grow more capable with experience. In practice, induced skills may transfer unreliably and can even harm the agent that retrieves them. When agent-induced skills transfer reliably across tasks remains an open question. We conduct a comprehensive and controlled study of how the way skills are induced shapes their transfer across tasks. Specifically, we compare task-level with subtask-level skill induction and text with code skill formats, the two axes along which existing methods differ. Task-level skills mostly reduce the agent's performance below its no-memory baseline while subtask-level skills raise it above on average, and text skills transfer better than code skills. To further understand our findings, we examine two complementary properties of the induced skills: specificity, which measures how closely a skill matches real tasks, and abstractness, which measures how evenly its relevance spreads across tasks. Neither property alone predicts task success, but their combined effect does, which we propose as a skill utility score. The score correlates consistently with task success when skills are transferred, and subtask-level and text skills score higher. Computing skill utility only needs the skills and task descriptions but not any task execution, so our score serves as a practical diagnostic of a skill memory before any new task runs.
Abstract:Large language model (LLM) agents can induce skills from completed tasks and reuse them later to grow more capable with experience. In practice, induced skills may transfer unreliably and can even harm the agent that retrieves them. When agent-induced skills transfer reliably across tasks remains an open question. We conduct a comprehensive and controlled study of how the way skills are induced shapes their transfer across tasks. Specifically, we compare task-level with subtask-level skill induction and text with code skill formats, the two axes along which existing methods differ. Task-level skills mostly reduce the agent's performance below its no-memory baseline while subtask-level skills raise it above on average, and text skills transfer better than code skills. To further understand our findings, we examine two complementary properties of the induced skills: specificity, which measures how closely a skill matches real tasks, and abstractness, which measures how evenly its relevance spreads across tasks. Neither property alone predicts task success, but their combined effect does, which we propose as a skill utility score. The score correlates consistently with task success when skills are transferred, and subtask-level and text skills score higher. Computing skill utility only needs the skills and task descriptions but not any task execution, so our score serves as a practical diagnostic of a skill memory before any new task runs.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2608.20274 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2608.20274v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.20274 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 318 words
Related coverage

Game Design Creativity evals
LessWrong · Oct 12, 2026

From Foundational Competency to Expert Performance: A Curriculum Approach to Model Development
Snorkel AI Blog · Sep 15, 2026
Performance Profiling on AMD GPUs – Part 5: Profiling-Driven Kernel Optimization with an AI Code-Assist Tool
AMD · Jul 16, 2026

Claude Code’s Next Era — Thariq Shihipar, Anthropic
Latent Space · Sep 29, 2026