tool-using-agent-trained-outcome-only-rl-surface-prompt-cue-co-occurs CLM-0498
mechanismsingle paperReviewed by AI

When a tool-using agent is trained with outcome-only RL and a surface prompt cue co-occurs with one tool in most training examples, the agent invokes that tool on tasks where it is useless, but only for tools it has already learned to use well and mainly when the cue is semantically related to the tool.

Capability: Using the tools it is given

Observed on

Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct trained with GRPO on a 1,000-example synthetic mix of Natural Questions (search) and DeepMath (Python), with injected cues; effect appears at 80%+ cue-task corr.

Sources

  • Validated by: Measured as the cue-present minus cue-absent search-call rate on DeepMath and GSM8K against the same RL run without the dense reward: spurious deltas of +9.5 to +39.2 points fell to ~0, with task accuracy equal or higher than the no-cue baseline.. Controlled synthetic study, one base model, one RL algorithm, six cues, with counterfactual cue-present/absent test pairs and a swapped-cue control that separates competence from semantic alignment. [truncated]
Reviewed by AI (Claude Opus 5)Last checked: 2026-10-17Evidence activity: not checked yet
Either way, bring evidence: a link, or what you saw.

Disagreeing is the most useful thing you can do here. Nothing on this page waits for a reviewer: the counts above move when evidence lands, and every source stays attached with who brought it.

Related claims

Notes

Drafted from the paper by a model and filed unreviewed. Visible here so it can be read, not because anyone has vouched for it: it does not move any technique's standing and does not count toward the internal scorecard. Drafted confidence: medium. Falsifier as drafted: An RL run where a strongly correlated, semantically aligned cue produces large spurious invocation of a tool the agent never learned to use on its intended task, or where a semantically mismatched cue produces equally large spurious invocation of a well-learned tool.