Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This arXiv preprint introduces a benchmark for LLM agents controlling robots through reusable "embodied skills," with a proposed mode (ADR) where the agent chooses when to call a skill. The main finding is that skills mainly help weaker agents, while stronger ones gain more from cost reduction than from new capability. Readers should note that the results come from one 100-task perturbed LIBERO-Pro setup, and the model names are not independently verified here.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Embodied Skill Bench: Benchmarking How Well Agents with Embodied Skills Perform on Physical Tasks

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2610.16238v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents increasingly control robots using VLA policies, perception models, and procedural knowledge. These modules are difficult to reuse because their interfaces, embodiment assumptions, and conditions of use differ, and their benefits on physical tasks remain unclear. We package them as embodied skills that extend agent skills with explicit embodiment assumptions and conditions of use, building 250 action, perception, and experience skills from 1,052 resources. On this basis we introduce EmbodiedSkillBench, which runs an agent in a closed observation-action loop and records success, actions, tokens, and wall-clock time. It supports three modes: native control, skill-only execution, and Agent-Directed Reuse (ADR), a mode we propose in which the agent keeps its native controls and decides for each skill whether to invoke, modify, or ignore it. Across four agents on 100 perturbed LIBERO-Pro tasks, we find that skills help an agent only as far as they exceed what it can already do. Skill-only execution lifts GPT-5.6-Sol from 11% to 63% and Kimi-K3 and Claude-Opus-5 by about 20 points, while cutting their token usage by 58% to 85%. Yet all four agents then end up between 61% and 64%, and GPT-6-Astra falls from 92% under native control to 61%. This suggests that as agents grow stronger, the role of embodied skills shifts from supplying missing capability to reducing cost: GPT-6-Astra already solves most tasks through native control, so restricting it to skills removes more than it adds. Under ADR, which lets it keep native control and call skills selectively, GPT-6-Astra recovers to 85%, within 7 points of native control, while using 14.1% fewer tokens and 11.9% less time. With Jev as a skill choosing motion directions and gripper actions, it reaches 81% with 50% fewer tokens and 57% less time. The code is available at https://github.com/HanZhi306/EmbodiedSkill-Bench.

Abstract:LLM agents increasingly control robots using VLA policies, perception models, and procedural knowledge. These modules are difficult to reuse because their interfaces, embodiment assumptions, and conditions of use differ, and their benefits on physical tasks remain unclear. We package them as embodied skills that extend agent skills with explicit embodiment assumptions and conditions of use, building 250 action, perception, and experience skills from 1,052 resources. On this basis we introduce EmbodiedSkillBench, which runs an agent in a closed observation-action loop and records success, actions, tokens, and wall-clock time. It supports three modes: native control, skill-only execution, and Agent-Directed Reuse (ADR), a mode we propose in which the agent keeps its native controls and decides for each skill whether to invoke, modify, or ignore it. Across four agents on 100 perturbed LIBERO-Pro tasks, we find that skills help an agent only as far as they exceed what it can already do. Skill-only execution lifts GPT-5.6-Sol from 11% to 63% and Kimi-K3 and Claude-Opus-5 by about 20 points, while cutting their token usage by 58% to 85%. Yet all four agents then end up between 61% and 64%, and GPT-6-Astra falls from 92% under native control to 61%. This suggests that as agents grow stronger, the role of embodied skills shifts from supplying missing capability to reducing cost: GPT-6-Astra already solves most tasks through native control, so restricting it to skills removes more than it adds. Under ADR, which lets it keep native control and call skills selectively, GPT-6-Astra recovers to 85%, within 7 points of native control, while using 14.1% fewer tokens and 11.9% less time. With Jev as a skill choosing motion directions and gripper actions, it reaches 81% with 50% fewer tokens and 57% less time. The code is available at this https URL.

25 pages, 7 figures, 9 tables, including appendices. Code: this https URL

Robotics (cs.RO)

arXiv:2610.16238 [cs.RO]

(or arXiv:2610.16238v1 [cs.RO] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.16238 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 · 400 words

Related coverage