Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This research identifies a critical dissociation in current tool-using agents, which frequently judge retrieval sources as useless yet fail to halt their search processes accordingly. The study demonstrates that standard prompting or budget constraints are insufficient to enforce this behavior, requiring specific architectural changes like enforced integration steps to align stopping decisions with evidence quality. For developers building agentic systems, these findings highlight the necessity of redesigning control loops to prevent wasted compute on failing tools.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Judged Useless, Queried Anyway: Tool-Using Agents Rarely Turn Their Own Evidence Judgments into Stopping Decisions

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2610.06191v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: An agent whose tool keeps returning nothing useful should stop relying on it. In a retrieval environment with controlled source failures, we separate how agents judge results from what they do. We compare stopping at the same step after longer and shorter runs of results the agent judged useless; this contrast is zero for clock- or deadline-driven stopping. Where we record their judgments, the seven agents we test call a failing source's results useless 97-100% of the time, yet most of them rarely stop on that judgment. Prompt cues change when they stop but not what they stop on. Permission to answer from memory and a reasoning mode can bring early stops regardless of evidence, a stated budget moves the 7-8B models' stops to the deadline, and a stopping rule or call cost in the prompt is followed at most partly. Stopping follows the evidence only when the harness enforces an integration step that makes the agent answer after five consecutive results it judged useless. This step raises failing-source success for every model, keeps the stopping point fixed when the budget doubles, and needs no extra judgment call when the agent states its judgments. A pre-registered replication on 300 fresh questions confirms the dissociation and the rule's effect.

Abstract:An agent whose tool keeps returning nothing useful should stop relying on it. In a retrieval environment with controlled source failures, we separate how agents judge results from what they do. We compare stopping at the same step after longer and shorter runs of results the agent judged useless; this contrast is zero for clock- or deadline-driven stopping. Where we record their judgments, the seven agents we test call a failing source's results useless 97-100% of the time, yet most of them rarely stop on that judgment. Prompt cues change when they stop but not what they stop on. Permission to answer from memory and a reasoning mode can bring early stops regardless of evidence, a stated budget moves the 7-8B models' stops to the deadline, and a stopping rule or call cost in the prompt is followed at most partly. Stopping follows the evidence only when the harness enforces an integration step that makes the agent answer after five consecutive results it judged useless. This step raises failing-source success for every model, keeps the stopping point fixed when the budget doubles, and needs no extra judgment call when the agent states its judgments. A pre-registered replication on 300 fresh questions confirms the dissociation and the rule's effect.

37 pages, 6 figures, 28 tables. Code: this https URL

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2610.06191 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2610.06191v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.06191 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 · 316 words

Related coverage