Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 cited by

LLM Agents Making Agent Tools

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2502.11705 v2 pith:AS5CQXFC submitted 2025-02-17 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LGcs.MA

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.LGcs.MA
keywords agentscodetoolmakertoolstasksautonomouslybenchmarkcomplex
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Tool use has turned large language models (LLMs) into powerful agents that can perform complex multi-step tasks by dynamically utilising external software components. However, these tools must be implemented in advance by human developers, hindering the applicability of LLM agents in domains demanding large numbers of highly specialised tools, like in life sciences and medicine. Motivated by the growing trend of scientific studies accompanied by public code repositories, we propose ToolMaker, an agentic framework that autonomously transforms papers with code into LLM-compatible tools. Given a GitHub URL and short task description, ToolMaker autonomously installs dependencies and generates code to perform the task, using a closed-loop self-correction mechanism for debugging. To evaluate our approach, we introduce a benchmark comprising 15 complex computational tasks spanning various domains with over 100 unit tests to assess correctness and robustness. Our method correctly implements 80% of the tasks, substantially outperforming current state-of-the-art software engineering agents. ToolMaker therefore is a step towards fully autonomous agent-based scientific workflows. Our code and benchmark are publicly available at https://github.com/KatherLab/ToolMaker.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Beyond Task Completion: A Verification-vs.-Conformance Gap in Tool-Evolving Agents

    cs.SE 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Synthesized tools from tool-evolving agents pass in-session checks but 96.8% of 222 tools score C=0.00 on held-out conformance suites that hand-written references pass perfectly.

  2. HarnessCompass: Guiding Automatic Harness Evolution toward Generalizable and Effective Agent Harnesses

    cs.LG 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A constrained, feedback-augmented, component-wise harness evolution loop improves coding agent Pass@1 on SWE-bench Verified and transfers to held-out tasks and another base model.

  3. When Compression Becomes an Attack Surface: Black-Box Attacks on Prompt-Compressed LLM Agents

    cs.CR 2025-10 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    The paper claims prompt compression is a new attack surface, but the abstract's COMA attack never appears in the body and the body's SoftCom requires white-box access.

  4. A Call for Collaborative Intelligence: Why Human-Agent Systems Should Precede AI Autonomy

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A position paper arguing that LLM-based human-agent systems, not fully autonomous agents, should be the immediate goal for AI development.

  5. LLM-Agent-Controller: A Universal Multi-Agent Large Language Model System as a Control Engineer

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A nine-agent LLM system with RAG and 140+ Python Control Library tools solves textbook control-theory tasks with a reported 83% completion rate.

  6. Vibe Coding vs. Agentic Coding: Fundamentals and Practical Implications of Agentic AI

    cs.SE 2025-05 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A qualitative taxonomy positions vibe coding and agentic coding as complementary paradigms rather than rivals in AI-assisted software development.

Pith tools