pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.29794 · v1 · pith:SL6XA2VUnew · submitted 2026-05-28 · 💻 cs.AI

SkillsInjector: Dynamic Skill Context Construction for LLM Agents

Yanchao Li , Wanhao Liu , Ben Gao , Jiaqing Xie , Zhehong Ai , Na Zou , Yuqiang Li , Tianfan Fu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 07:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI
keywords LLM agentsskill injectionadaptive contextcontext plannerset-aware renderingtask completion
0
0 comments X

The pith

Dynamic adjustment of skill count, selection, and presentation improves LLM agent task completion on three benchmarks.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper argues that static skill injection into LLM agents is suboptimal because the choice of which skills to include, how many, and how their descriptions are worded all affect downstream success. SkillsInjector addresses this with a two-stage process: a context planner that learns execution-grounded preferences and selects a variable number of skills per task, followed by a set-aware renderer that modifies descriptions according to the other skills chosen for the same task. Experiments show this yields the top scores on tau2-bench, SkillsBench, and ALFWorld, beating the strongest baseline by 3.9, 6.1, and 7.3 percentage points. Ablation results indicate that adaptive budgeting, selection, and rendering each add measurable value. The central claim is therefore that skill-augmented agents improve when the injected context is itself optimized rather than fixed in advance.

Core claim

SkillsInjector is a two-stage adaptive method in which a context planner learns execution-grounded skill preferences to admit a task-specific number of skills, after which a set-aware renderer tailors the wording of each selected skill description relative to its co-injected neighbors; this joint optimization produces the highest task-completion rates observed across tau2-bench, SkillsBench, and ALFWorld.

What carries the argument

The context planner that learns execution-grounded preferences and admits a variable skill budget, paired with the set-aware renderer that conditions each description on its neighbors in the injected set.

If this is right

  • Task completion rises when the number of injected skills is allowed to vary with the specific task instead of being fixed in advance.
  • Skill descriptions become more effective when their wording is adjusted for the particular set of other skills that accompany them.
  • Skill libraries yield higher utility once the process of deciding which skills to expose, how many to use, and how to present them is treated as an optimizable part of the agent loop.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same adaptive-context idea could be applied to other fixed elements of agent prompts such as tool lists or memory summaries.
  • The approach may become more valuable as skill libraries grow larger, where static selection rules are likely to leave many useful skills unused or to include irrelevant ones.
  • If the planner and renderer can be trained jointly end-to-end, further gains might appear beyond the current two-stage pipeline.

Load-bearing premise

That the measured gains are produced by the adaptive planner and renderer rather than by unstated differences in baseline implementations or benchmark details.

What would settle it

A controlled re-implementation of the baselines using identical code and evaluation settings that eliminates the reported gaps would falsify the claim that the two-stage adaptive components are responsible for the improvement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.29794 by Ben Gao, Jiaqing Xie, Na Zou, Tianfan Fu, Wanhao Liu, Yanchao Li, Yuqiang Li, Zhehong Ai.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Scaling the candidate skill pool on tau2-bench. Static all-injection (red) collapses as the candidate skill pool grows, while our method (blue) remains stable. terize the structure behind the skill-injection bottle￾neck. Skill effects are heterogeneous across both quality and cost, and tasks differ in how much skill context they can exploit. These findings motivates task-specific context allocation that se… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: SkillsInjector pipeline. The planner learns execution-grounded skill utility, while the renderer adapts selected descriptions with awareness of co-injected skills. At inference, the trained components select an adaptive skill set and inject the rendered context into a frozen agent. 3 Problem Formulation We consider skill injection for a frozen agent op￾erating over a fixed skill library. A task t ∼ D is ex… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Adaptive budget distribution. Each panel shows the histogram of per-task selected budget Bt in one tau2-bench domain, under the dev-calibrated τ ⋆ d and cap Bmax = 16. messages per task (M¯ ). airline retail telecom Variant pass ↑ M¯ ↓ pass ↑ M¯ ↓ pass ↑ M¯ ↓ Full SkillsInjector 60.0 28.5 61.4 25.7 67.0 61.5 w/o renderer 55.2 36.7 59.6 33.2 65.8 67.6 w/o planner 47.2 26.0 51.4 24.5 52.5 57.1 w/o adaptive b… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Admission-threshold sweep. Whiskers show ±1σ over five seeds, the dashed line is the no-skill base￾line, hollow markers denote means at or below the base￾line, and the highlighted marker gives the dev-selected τ ⋆ d . 5.5 Planner ablation Within the planner we ablate the two loss com￾ponents and the encoder backbone. w/o Lalign keeps only the pairwise preference signal; w/o Lpref keeps only the soft alignm… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Per-skill effects. Each point is one skill, plotted by its change in pass rate and in agent messages per task against the no-skill baseline. One panel per tau2-bench domain. Most skills are helpful but raise interaction cost, while a long tail actively reduces pass rate. This motivates selecting skills by predicted utility rather than injecting a domain-level shortlist. 0 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 0 25 50 75 100 Pa… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Per-task responses to larger skill sets. Each panel shows the average pass-rate trajectory of two task groups within one tau2-bench domain. Tasks are grouped by the Spearman correlation between N and reward into improving (ρ > 0.3) and degrading (ρ < −0.3). The two groups diverge as N grows, showing why a fixed large skill budget fails at the aggregate level. airline retail telecom Renderer variant pass ↑ … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

LLM agents now draw on growing skill libraries to handle complex tasks. However, injecting more skills does not always improve task completion and can even degrade it. Existing methods still treat skill injection as a static step, selecting skills with fixed criteria, fixing the budget in advance, and leaving descriptions unchanged. We argue that this static treatment can undermine the utility of skills, because which skills are exposed, how many are included, and how they are presented all affect downstream performance. We propose SkillsInjector, a two-stage adaptive method that jointly addresses these decisions. First, a context planner learns execution-grounded skill preferences and admits an adaptive number of skills for each task. A set-aware renderer then tailors how selected descriptions are presented relative to their co-injected neighbors. Across tau2-bench, SkillsBench, and ALFWorld, SkillsInjector achieves the highest score, improving over the strongest baseline by 3.9, 6.1, and 7.3 percentage points, respectively. Ablation studies show that skill selection, adaptive budgeting, and set-aware rendering each contribute to the gain. These results show that skill-augmented agents benefit from optimizing the injected context itself. Code will be released upon publication

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes SkillsInjector, a two-stage adaptive method for dynamic skill context construction in LLM agents. The first stage is a context planner that learns execution-grounded skill preferences and selects an adaptive number of skills per task; the second is a set-aware renderer that tailors skill descriptions based on their co-injected neighbors. Evaluated on tau2-bench, SkillsBench, and ALFWorld, it reports the highest scores, outperforming the strongest baseline by 3.9, 6.1, and 7.3 percentage points respectively, with ablation studies indicating contributions from skill selection, adaptive budgeting, and set-aware rendering.

Significance. If the experimental results hold under controlled conditions, the work would be significant for demonstrating that static skill injection can be improved by jointly optimizing selection, budgeting, and presentation in LLM agent contexts. The emphasis on adaptive, execution-grounded decisions and the planned code release would support reproducibility and further research in skill-augmented agents.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract / Experiments] Abstract and experimental sections: the reported improvements of 3.9/6.1/7.3 pp are presented without error bars, number of evaluation runs, or statistical significance tests, preventing assessment of whether the gains are reliable or could arise from variance.
  2. [Experiments] Experimental setup: no explicit confirmation that baselines received identical skill libraries, identical LLM backbones, identical prompt templates outside the proposed components, or identical evaluation protocols. Without these controls, the central claim that gains are produced by the adaptive context planner and set-aware renderer cannot be isolated from unstated implementation differences.
  3. [Ablations] Ablation studies: while the abstract states that skill selection, adaptive budgeting, and set-aware rendering each contribute, no specific ablation results, tables, or quantitative breakdowns are referenced, leaving the contribution of each component unverified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The benchmark names (tau2-bench, SkillsBench, ALFWorld) should be consistently formatted and briefly described on first use for readers unfamiliar with the suite.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states 'Code will be released upon publication' but provides no link or repository placeholder; this should be clarified if a preprint repository is intended.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

Thank you for the constructive feedback. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the experimental reporting and clarity.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Experiments] Abstract and experimental sections: the reported improvements of 3.9/6.1/7.3 pp are presented without error bars, number of evaluation runs, or statistical significance tests, preventing assessment of whether the gains are reliable or could arise from variance.

    Authors: We agree that the current presentation lacks these details. In the revised manuscript we will report the number of evaluation runs (five independent runs per method per benchmark), include standard deviation error bars on all main results, and add paired t-test p-values comparing SkillsInjector to the strongest baseline on each benchmark to establish statistical significance. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Experiments] Experimental setup: no explicit confirmation that baselines received identical skill libraries, identical LLM backbones, identical prompt templates outside the proposed components, or identical evaluation protocols. Without these controls, the central claim that gains are produced by the adaptive context planner and set-aware renderer cannot be isolated from unstated implementation differences.

    Authors: We will add a new paragraph in Section 4.1 (Experimental Setup) that explicitly states all methods, including baselines, used the identical skill library, the same LLM backbone (GPT-4-0613), the same base prompt templates outside the skill-injection components, and the official benchmark evaluation scripts with identical success criteria and episode limits. This isolates the contribution of the context planner and renderer. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Ablations] Ablation studies: while the abstract states that skill selection, adaptive budgeting, and set-aware rendering each contribute, no specific ablation results, tables, or quantitative breakdowns are referenced, leaving the contribution of each component unverified.

    Authors: The full paper contains an ablation table (Table 5) with quantitative breakdowns. To improve visibility we will revise the abstract to reference this table directly and add a sentence in Section 5.3 summarizing the per-component deltas (e.g., removing adaptive budgeting drops performance by X pp on tau2-bench). We will also ensure every ablation result is cited from the table in the text. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; purely empirical method with ablations.

full rationale

The paper advances an empirical two-stage method (context planner + set-aware renderer) for dynamic skill injection in LLM agents and supports its claims solely via benchmark scores (tau2-bench, SkillsBench, ALFWorld) plus ablation studies. No equations, first-principles derivations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided text. The performance deltas are presented as experimental outcomes, not as outputs forced by construction from the inputs. This is the normal, non-circular case for an applied systems paper.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract mentions no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities beyond standard concepts in LLM agents. Assessment is limited to the abstract alone.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5762 in / 1133 out tokens · 39457 ms · 2026-06-29T07:23:08.732294+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

2 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    SkillReducer: Optimizing LLM Agent Skills for Token Efficiency

    Learning to rank using gradient descent. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML ’05, page 89–96, New York, NY , USA. Association for Computing Machin- ery. Wei Fang, Yang Zhang, Kaizhi Qian, James R. Glass, and Yada Zhu. 2025. PLAY2PROMPT: Zero-shot tool instruction optimization for LLM agents via tool play. InFindin...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Model Context Protocol (MCP) Tool Descriptions Are Smelly! Towards Improving AI Agent Efficiency with Augmented MCP Tool Descriptions

    Toolkengpt: Augmenting frozen language models with massive tools via tool embeddings. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 36, pages 45870–45894. Curran Associates, Inc. Mohammed Mehedi Hasan, Hao Li, Gopi Krishnan Rajbahadur, Bram Adams, and Ahmed E. Has- san. 2026. Model context protocol (mcp) tool de- scriptions are smelly! towa...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026