Papers for

software tool integrators

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Instruction order shapes conflicts in large language model agents

Position, Role or Label? A Controlled Study of Instruction Conflicts in LLM Agents

Abstract: LLM agents take instructions from the operator, repository configuration, user, tool results and saved memory, which often conflict. Instruction-hierarchy benchmarks ask whether the higher-ranked source wins, but a source sets position, role and label at once. First, we build WhoWins, 1,080 code-scored scenarios in five task types, each with up to five mutually exclusive instructions, and seven controlled experiments that vary only how instructions are delivered. Second, we study 14 open-weight models (0.6B to 122B, thinking off and on) over 1,887,356 scored replies, checking main findings on held-out scenarios. Inside one message the first of two conflicting lines wins 72.42 to 94.66%, and across messages it keeps 22.95 to 62.65%. A policy sent first in the system (or developer) message loses most conflicts with later lines in every Qwen model but wins most on gpt-oss when it acts. In tool and file-write tasks it wins less often than the same text sent first as a labelled user message, in every model-mode. Third, we test whether pairs forecast larger conflicts; forecasts improve in every model-mode once they know where the task line is. Finally, by our keyword patterns at most 2.92% of decided pair replies flag or hedge a conflict.

Fri 23 OctComputation and LanguageArtificial IntelligenceSoftware Engineering
The gist
Large language model (LLM) agents often receive conflicting instructions from different sources. The authors studied which instructions have more influence by testing order, labels, and roles across many scenarios and models. They found that the first conflicting instruction in one message usually wins, but this effect lessens when conflicts span multiple messages. Models behave differently depending on message type and task, and only a small fraction of responses show awareness of instruction conflicts. This helps understand how LLM agents prioritize instructions in complex settings.
Open → 2610.33201v1

NeoHorse-1 improves AI models by learning from their own use

NeoHorse-1: Towards Recursive Self-Improvement via Agentic Post-Training with Routing Harness

Abstract: Recursive self-improvement (RSI) requires a concrete mechanism through which an AI system observes its capabilities and converts that evidence into the next round of learning. We present NeoHorse-1, a family of agent-native models developed to explore this path through agentic post-training. Our system combines a heterogeneous model pool with intelligent routing, recording the predicted capability demand, selected service tier, and subsequent interaction for each user turn. These records are converted into training examples that preserve interleaved reasoning, tool calls, and harness context, and are admitted through structural validation, six-dimensional semantic evaluation, and subscene-level labeling. Routing signals organize supervised fine-tuning into a three-stage curriculum and extend to routing-guided on-policy distillation, where a teacher supervises student-generated responses under the same progression. Capability-guided allocation then converts evaluation feedback into the next training mixture, closing an evaluation-selection-update loop in which what the system learns to do shapes what it learns from next. Across eleven benchmarks covering harness-based agents, tool use, coding, and instruction following, post-training raises the macro-average from 58.94 to 64.87 at 4B and from 65.60 to 69.04 at 9B, substantially narrowing the aggregate gap between the post-trained 4B model and the 9B base model. NeoHorse-1 provides an initial prototype of this feedback-driven process and a path toward harness-mediated RSI across successive iterations.

Tue 8 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
Improving AI often means finding ways for the AI to learn from its own performance in tasks. The researchers created NeoHorse-1, a system where AI models watch their own actions and use that information to get better at future tasks. This happens through a cycle of selecting tasks, recording how the AI responds, and retraining itself using these records guided by a smart routing system. The result was better overall performance on several benchmarks, especially narrowing the gap between smaller and larger AI models.
Open → 2609.08183v1

SkillAlign improves task success by changing how skills are shown

SkillAlign: Aligning Skill Interfaces for LLM-based Agents

Abstract: Language-model agents increasingly rely on skills: reusable procedural knowledge for reasoning, tool use, and interaction. Existing work studies how skills are acquired, retrieved, compressed, or composed, but often assumes that once a skill is selected, its interface to the agent is fixed. We argue that this overlooks a key source of skill utility: the same skill can help, distract, or mislead depending on how it is exposed. We propose SkillAlign, a provider-agnostic framework that represents candidate skills as multi-view procedural cards and renders them through alternative exposure interfaces, including full instructions, hints, compressed summaries, workflows, or no exposure. This enables counterfactual evaluation where the task, agent, and candidate skills are fixed while only the exposure interface varies. Across ALFWorld and SkillsBench, we show that exposure form substantially affects task success and rendered context cost, and that compact top-k exposure can outperform full-library injection. We further conduct a replay-based policy-learning analysis on ALFWorld, showing that adaptive exposure contains learnable signal but remains far from oracle selection. Our results suggest that skill-augmented agents should optimize not only which skills to use, but also how those skills are presented.

Mon 7 SeptArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Large language model agents use skills to help complete tasks, but how these skills are shown to the agent can make a big difference. The authors created SkillAlign, which tries different ways of presenting the same skills, like full instructions or short hints. They found that changing the way skills are given to the agent affects success rates and the cost of using the agent. This means it’s not just important which skills are used, but also how they are presented.
Open → 2609.07255v1