pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.07538 · v1 · pith:KDFPBMY6new · submitted 2026-04-29 · 💻 cs.IR · cs.AI

Bidirectional Semantic Complementary Tool Retrieval for Remote Sensing Agents

Zeyuan Wang , Dongyang Hou , Cheng Yang , Xuezhi Cui , Linrui Xu , Bo Yu , Gaozhi Zhou , Ziyu Li
show 5 more authors
Liangtian Liu Kai Ouyang Wang Guo Lili Zhu Chao Tao
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 08:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.IR cs.AI
keywords tool retrievalremote sensing agentsLLM agentssemantic asymmetryquery enhancementdependency graphAPI retrieval
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bidirectional semantic complementary retrieval overcomes asymmetry between natural language queries and tool documentation for remote sensing agents.

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

The paper targets imprecise tool retrieval in LLM agents handling remote sensing tasks where tool libraries exceed context limits. Queries state high-level goals but miss technical details, while tool docs give fine-grained specs without workflow context. A planning step decomposes queries into subtasks to add missing functional meaning, and a dynamic dependency graph aggregates neighborhood context into each tool's representation. Experiments show accuracy gains on the GeoPlan-bench remote-sensing set and transfer to the general API-Bank set.

Core claim

The bidirectional mechanism first applies planning-based query enhancement to decompose abstract intentions into logical subtasks that inject functional semantics, then builds a dynamic tool dependency graph whose neighborhood aggregation injects precursor-tool context into each node's embedding, jointly closing the semantic asymmetry and raising retrieval precision for chained remote-sensing workflows.

What carries the argument

Bidirectional semantic complementary retrieval: planning-based query enhancement on the query side plus neighborhood aggregation over a dynamic tool dependency graph on the tool side.

If this is right

  • Tool retrieval accuracy rises measurably on complex remote-sensing tasks in GeoPlan-bench.
  • The same approach transfers to general-domain tool retrieval on API-Bank without domain-specific retraining.
  • Strongly coupled RS tool chains receive explicit contextual semantics through the dependency graph.
  • Agents can select precise tools even when full documentation exceeds the LLM context window.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same query-planning plus graph-aggregation pattern may apply to other agent settings where user goals are abstract and tools are technical.
  • Continual updates to the dependency graph could let agents incorporate new tools without rebuilding embeddings from scratch.
  • Lower context-window pressure from better retrieval could reduce token usage and latency in long agent sessions.

Load-bearing premise

Semantic asymmetry between queries and tool documentation is the dominant retrieval bottleneck, and the two proposed mechanisms close the gap without creating new mismatches.

What would settle it

If the method is run on GeoPlan-bench and shows no statistically significant accuracy lift over standard retrieval baselines, the claim that the bidirectional enhancements solve the asymmetry problem would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.07538 by Bo Yu, Chao Tao, Cheng Yang, Dongyang Hou, Gaozhi Zhou, Kai Ouyang, Liangtian Liu, Lili Zhu, Linrui Xu, Wang Guo, Xuezhi Cui, Zeyuan Wang, Ziyu Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Comparison of tool retrieval paradigms for the remote sensing agent. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overall framework of our proposed bidirectional semantic alignment approach. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Impact of the aggregation order k on retrieval performance. The shaded area represents the performance confidence trend, with the peak occurring at k = 1, highlighting the importance of local contextual features. The experimental results exhibit a clear bell-shaped trend, with the Recall@k peaking at 0.7485 when α = 0.5. This phenomenon can be analyzed from two perspectives: • Insufficient Context Aggregat… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of different graph propagation directions on GeoPlan [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Large language model (LLM)-based agents provide a novel paradigm for the automated processing of remote sensing(RS) data. Their success in complex RS tasks rely on extensive specialized tool libraries. However, tool documentation often exceeds the context window limits of LLMs, making precise tool retrieval essential for agentic workflows. Existing tool retrieval methods face "semantic asymmetry" bottleneck: natural language queries typically express macro-level intentions lacking tool-specific semantics, while tool documentation provides fine-grained technical descriptions lacking operational context for workflows. To bridge this semantic gap, this paper proposes a bidirectional semantic complementary tool retrieval method. First, on the query side, we introduce a planning-based query enhancement mechanism that leverages the reasoning capabilities of agents to decompose abstract intentions into logical subtasks, thereby actively supplementing the query with missing functional semantics. Second, on the tool side, addressing the strong coupling characteristics of RS tool chains, we construct a dynamic tool dependency graph with continual learning capabilities. By employing a neighborhood information aggregation mechanism, contextual information from precursor tools is explicitly injected into the current node representation, enriching tool descriptions with contextual semantics. Experimental results on the RS dataset GeoPlan-bench and the general-purpose dataset API- Bank demonstrate that the proposed method not only significantly improves tool retrieval accuracy for complex RS tasks but also exhibits robust extensibility for transfer to general-domain tasks. The source code and dataset are available at https://github.com/geox-lab/BSCTR.

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 claims that existing tool retrieval methods suffer from a 'semantic asymmetry' bottleneck between macro-level natural language queries and fine-grained tool documentation. It proposes a bidirectional semantic complementary tool retrieval (BSCTR) approach: (1) a planning-based query enhancement mechanism that uses agent reasoning to decompose intentions into logical subtasks, and (2) a dynamic tool dependency graph with continual learning and neighborhood aggregation to inject precursor-tool context into tool representations. Experiments on the RS-specific GeoPlan-bench and the general API-Bank dataset are asserted to demonstrate significant accuracy gains for complex RS tasks plus robust transferability to general domains.

Significance. If the claimed accuracy improvements and transfer results hold under rigorous evaluation, the work would address a practical bottleneck in LLM-based agents for remote sensing workflows, where tool libraries are large and chained. The bidirectional framing (query planning plus graph-based context) is a reasonable response to the asymmetry problem and could generalize beyond RS if the mechanisms prove robust.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim of 'significantly improves tool retrieval accuracy' on GeoPlan-bench and API-Bank supplies no numerical metrics, baselines, statistical tests, error bars, or dataset statistics. Without these, the magnitude, reliability, and reproducibility of the reported gains cannot be assessed.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (method description): The query-side planning step assumes LLM decomposition will reliably add functional semantics without introducing hallucinations or incorrect subtasks, yet no ablation, error analysis, or failure-case discussion is referenced to support this assumption.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract (method description): The tool-side dynamic dependency graph with 'continual learning' and neighborhood aggregation is presented as addressing strong coupling in RS tool chains, but the abstract provides no implementation details on graph construction, update mechanism, or how aggregation avoids diluting representations or creating spurious edges.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The GitHub link is provided, but the abstract does not indicate whether the released code includes the exact experimental configurations, dataset splits, or hyper-parameters used for the reported results.
  2. [Abstract] The term 'semantic asymmetry' is introduced without a formal definition or quantitative measure of the asymmetry (e.g., embedding distance statistics between queries and tools).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and outline the revisions we will make to strengthen the presentation, particularly in the abstract.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim of 'significantly improves tool retrieval accuracy' on GeoPlan-bench and API-Bank supplies no numerical metrics, baselines, statistical tests, error bars, or dataset statistics. Without these, the magnitude, reliability, and reproducibility of the reported gains cannot be assessed.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including key quantitative results. In the revised manuscript, we will update the abstract to report specific accuracy improvements (e.g., top-1 and top-5 retrieval gains over baselines), the primary evaluation metrics, and dataset sizes for both GeoPlan-bench and API-Bank. Full statistical tests, error bars, and complete dataset statistics remain in the experimental section (Section 4) and will be referenced. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (method description): The query-side planning step assumes LLM decomposition will reliably add functional semantics without introducing hallucinations or incorrect subtasks, yet no ablation, error analysis, or failure-case discussion is referenced to support this assumption.

    Authors: The assumption is supported by ablations in Section 4.3, which isolate the contribution of the planning-based enhancement and show consistent gains without degradation attributable to hallucinations. We will revise the abstract to briefly note that the mechanism is validated through controlled experiments. A more detailed error analysis and failure cases are already present in the main text and supplementary material; we can add a one-sentence pointer in the abstract if space allows. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (method description): The tool-side dynamic dependency graph with 'continual learning' and neighborhood aggregation is presented as addressing strong coupling in RS tool chains, but the abstract provides no implementation details on graph construction, update mechanism, or how aggregation avoids diluting representations or creating spurious edges.

    Authors: Implementation details for graph construction, the continual learning update rule, and the neighborhood aggregation (including safeguards against dilution and spurious edges) are provided in Section 3.2. We will revise the abstract to include a concise clause indicating that the graph is built dynamically from tool co-occurrence patterns with explicit aggregation controls. This addresses the brevity concern without altering the technical content. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: method is a new construction evaluated on external benchmarks

full rationale

The paper introduces a bidirectional retrieval approach consisting of planning-based query enhancement on the query side and neighborhood aggregation over a dynamic tool dependency graph on the tool side. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations appear in the provided text that would reduce any claimed accuracy gain to a definitional identity or to a prior result by the same authors. The central claims rest on experimental evaluation against the external datasets GeoPlan-bench and API-Bank rather than on any internal re-labeling or self-referential fitting, rendering the derivation self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; it introduces no explicit numerical free parameters, no new physical or mathematical entities, and relies on the domain assumption that semantic asymmetry is the dominant retrieval obstacle.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Semantic asymmetry between macro-level queries and fine-grained tool documentation is the main retrieval bottleneck in RS agent workflows.
    Directly stated in the abstract as the problem the method is designed to solve.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5818 in / 1291 out tokens · 34346 ms · 2026-07-01T08:37:38.802495+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

34 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models,

    S. Yao, J. Zhao, D. Yu, N. Du, I. Shafran, K. R. Narasimhan, and Y . Cao, “React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models,” inThe eleventh international conference on learning representations, 2022

    2022

  2. [2]

    Plan-and-Solve Prompting: Improving Zero-Shot Chain-of-Thought Reasoning by Large Language Models

    L. Wang, W. Xu, Y . Lan, Z. Hu, Y . Lan, R. K.-W. Lee, and E.-P. Lim, “Plan-and-solve prompting: Improving zero-shot chain-of-thought reasoning by large language models,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.04091, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    RS- Agent: Automating remote sensing tasks through intelligent agent,

    W. Xu, Z. Yu, B. Mu, Z. Wei, Y . Zhang, G. Li, and M. Peng, “Rs- agent: Automating remote sensing tasks through intelligent agent,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.07089, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Designing domain-specific agents via hierarchical task abstraction mechanism,

    K. Li, J. Wang, Z. Wang, H. Qiao, W. Zhang, D. Meng, and X. Cao, “Designing domain-specific agents via hierarchical task abstraction mechanism,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17198, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Tool Learning with Foundation Models

    Y . Qin, S. Hu, Y . Lin, W. Chen, N. Ding, G. Cui, Z. Zeng, Y . Huang, C. Xiao, C. Han, Y . R. Fung, Y . Su, H. Wang, C. Qian, R. Tian, K. Zhu, S. Liang, X. Shen, B. Xu, Z. Zhang, Y . Ye, B. Li, Z. Tang, J. Yi, Y . Zhu, Z. Dai, L. Yan, X. Cong, Y . Lu, W. Zhao, Y . Huang, J. Yan, X. Han, X. Sun, D. Li, J. Phang, C. Yang, T. Wu, H. Ji, Z. Liu, and M. Sun, ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    (2025, Feb) Benchmarking single agent performance

    LangChain Team. (2025, Feb) Benchmarking single agent performance. Accessed: YYYY-MM-DD. [Online]. Available: https://blog.langchain. com/react-agent-benchmarking/

    2025

  7. [7]

    Gorilla: Large language model connected with massive apis,

    S. G. Patil, T. Zhang, X. Wang, and J. E. Gonzalez, “Gorilla: Large language model connected with massive apis,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 37, pp. 126 544–126 565, 2024

    2024

  8. [8]

    ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs

    Y . Qin, S. Liang, Y . Ye, K. Zhu, L. Yan, Y . Lu, Y . Lin, X. Cong, X. Tang, B. Qianet al., “Toolllm: Facilitating large language models to master 16000+ real-world apis,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.16789, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  9. [9]

    Foundations of the theory of signs,

    C. W. Morris, “Foundations of the theory of signs,” inInternational encyclopedia of unified science. Chicago University Press, 1938, pp. 1–59

    1938

  10. [10]

    Toolreagt: tool retrieval for llm-based complex task solution via retrieval augmented generation,

    N. Braunschweiler, R. Doddipatla, and T.-C. Zorila, “Toolreagt: tool retrieval for llm-based complex task solution via retrieval augmented generation,” inProceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Towards Knowl- edgeable Foundation Models (KnowFM), 2025, pp. 75–83

    2025

  11. [11]

    Improving tool retrieval by leveraging large language models for query generation,

    M. Kachuee, S. Ahuja, V . Kumar, P. Xu, and X. Liu, “Improving tool retrieval by leveraging large language models for query generation,” inProceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Industry Track, 2025, pp. 29–38

    2025

  12. [12]

    Toolnet: Connecting large language models with massive tools via tool graph,

    X. Liu, Z. Peng, X. Yi, X. Xie, L. Xiang, Y . Liu, and D. Xu, “Toolnet: Connecting large language models with massive tools via tool graph,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.00839, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Graph rag-tool fusion,

    E. Lumer, P. H. Basavaraju, M. Mason, J. A. Burke, and V . K. Subbiah, “Graph rag-tool fusion,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.07223, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Simplifying graph convolutional networks,

    F. Wu, A. Souza, T. Zhang, C. Fifty, T. Yu, and K. Weinberger, “Simplifying graph convolutional networks,” inInternational conference on machine learning. Pmlr, 2019, pp. 6861–6871

    2019

  15. [15]

    Api-bank: A comprehensive benchmark for tool-augmented llms,

    M. Li, Y . Zhao, B. Yu, F. Song, H. Li, H. Yu, Z. Li, F. Huang, and Y . Li, “Api-bank: A comprehensive benchmark for tool-augmented llms,” in Proceedings of the 2023 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, 2023, pp. 3102–3116

    2023

  16. [16]

    Geochat: Grounded large vision-language model for remote sensing,

    K. Kuckreja, M. S. Danish, M. Naseer, A. Das, S. Khan, and F. S. Khan, “Geochat: Grounded large vision-language model for remote sensing,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 27 831–27 840

    2024

  17. [17]

    Earthgpt: A universal multimodal large language model for multisensor image comprehension in remote sensing domain,

    W. Zhang, M. Cai, T. Zhang, Y . Zhuang, and X. Mao, “Earthgpt: A universal multimodal large language model for multisensor image comprehension in remote sensing domain,”IEEE Transactions on Geo- science and Remote Sensing, vol. 62, pp. 1–20, 2024

    2024

  18. [18]

    Allspark: A multimodal spatio-temporal general intelligence model with ten modalities via language as a reference framework,

    R. Shao, C. Yang, Q. Li, L. Xu, X. Yang, X. Li, M. Li, Q. Zhu, Y . Zhang, Y . Liet al., “Allspark: A multimodal spatio-temporal general intelligence model with ten modalities via language as a reference framework,”IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2025

    2025

  19. [19]

    Earth-agent: Unlocking the full landscape of earth observation with agents,

    P. Feng, Z. Lv, J. Ye, X. Wang, X. Huo, J. Yu, W. Xu, W. Zhang, L. Bai, C. He, and W. Li, “Earth-agent: Unlocking the full landscape of earth observation with agents,” 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.23141

    work page arXiv 2026

  20. [20]

    Geogpt: An assistant for understanding and processing geospatial tasks,

    Y . Zhang, C. Wei, Z. He, and W. Yu, “Geogpt: An assistant for understanding and processing geospatial tasks,”International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, vol. 131, p. 103976, 2024

    2024

  21. [21]

    Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models,

    J. Wei, X. Wang, D. Schuurmans, M. Bosma, F. Xia, E. Chi, Q. V . Le, D. Zhouet al., “Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 35, pp. 24 824–24 837, 2022

    2022

  22. [22]

    Llm-planner: Few-shot grounded planning for embodied agents with large language models,

    C. H. Song, J. Wu, C. Washington, B. M. Sadler, W.-L. Chao, and Y . Su, “Llm-planner: Few-shot grounded planning for embodied agents with large language models,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 2023, pp. 2998–3009

    2023

  23. [23]

    Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models,

    S. Yao, D. Yu, J. Zhao, I. Shafran, T. Griffiths, Y . Cao, and K. Narasimhan, “Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 36, pp. 11 809–11 822, 2023

    2023

  24. [24]

    Re-invoke: Tool invocation rewriting for zero- shot tool retrieval,

    Y . Chen, J. Yoon, D. S. Sachan, Q. Wang, V . Cohen-Addad, M. Bateni, C.-Y . Lee, and T. Pfister, “Re-invoke: Tool invocation rewriting for zero- shot tool retrieval,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.01875, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Tooldreamer: Instilling llm reasoning into tool retrievers,

    S. Sengupta, Z. Zhou, J. Araki, X. Wang, B. Wang, S. Wang, and Z. Feng, “Tooldreamer: Instilling llm reasoning into tool retrievers,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.19791, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Autotool: Efficient tool selection for large language model agents,

    J. Jia and Q. Li, “Autotool: Efficient tool selection for large language model agents,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.14650, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Scitoolagent: a knowledge-graph-driven scientific agent for multitool integration,

    K. Ding, J. Yu, J. Huang, Y . Yang, Q. Zhang, and H. Chen, “Scitoolagent: a knowledge-graph-driven scientific agent for multitool integration,” Nature Computational Science, vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 962–972, 2025

    2025

  28. [28]

    Tool graph retriever: Exploring dependency graph-based tool retrieval for large language models,

    L. Gao, Y . Wang, M. Peng, J. Tang, Y . Shang, M. Sun, and J. Su, “Tool graph retriever: Exploring dependency graph-based tool retrieval for large language models,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.05152, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networks

    T. Kipf, “Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional net- works,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.02907, 2016

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  30. [30]

    Predict then propagate: Graph neural networks meet personalized pagerank,

    J. Gasteiger, A. Bojchevski, and S. G ¨unnemann, “Predict then propagate: Graph neural networks meet personalized pagerank,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.05997, 2018. 13

    work page arXiv 2018

  31. [31]

    Reciprocal rank fusion outperforms condorcet and individual rank learning methods,

    G. V . Cormack, C. L. Clarke, and S. Buettcher, “Reciprocal rank fusion outperforms condorcet and individual rank learning methods,” inProceedings of the 32nd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, 2009, pp. 758–759

    2009

  32. [32]

    Robertson and H

    S. Robertson and H. Zaragoza,The probabilistic relevance framework: BM25 and beyond. Now Publishers Inc, 2009, vol. 4

    2009

  33. [33]

    Dense passage retrieval for open-domain question answering,

    V . Karpukhin, B. Oguz, S. Min, P. Lewis, L. Wu, S. Edunov, D. Chen, and W.-t. Yih, “Dense passage retrieval for open-domain question answering,” inProceedings of the 2020 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), 2020, pp. 6769–6781

    2020

  34. [34]

    DeepSeek-V3.2: Pushing the Frontier of Open Large Language Models

    A. Liu, A. Mei, B. Lin, B. Xue, B. Wang, B. Xu, B. Wu, B. Zhang, C. Lin, C. Donget al., “Deepseek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.02556, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025