arxiv-2608-23635 SRC-0438 · paperToolRobustBench: Stage-Wise Perturbation Evaluation and Failure Diagnosis for Tool-Calling Agents
Zheng Yishan, Yuan Wu, Yi Chang
Created: 2026-08-23 · Ingested: 2026-10-17
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.23635(opens in a new tab)Large language models (LLMs) rely on tool calling as a fundamental agent capability, enabling them to invoke external systems and complete tasks beyond text generation. However, clean end-to-end (E2E) success cannot identify where a tool-use failure originates or how it propagates through a call. We introduce ToolRobustBench, a stage-wise diagnostic benchmark for tool-calling agents, where a tool-calling agent is an LLM system that selects a tool, supplies structured arguments, and interprets its returned feedback. ToolRobustBench aligns four perturbation families with the tool-use pipeline: t
Referenced by
Claims in this catalog that draw on this source, and whether as support or counterpoint.
- supportsFor single-step tool-calling agents, near-ceiling accuracy on unperturbed calls does not predict robustness to perturbation, and corrupting or removing the tool's returned evidence hurts far more than perturbing tool names, descriptions, or the user request.
- supportsFor single-step tool-calling agents, near-perfect clean accuracy does not predict robustness, and the dominant weak point is recovering the answer from perturbed tool returns rather than selecting the tool or binding arguments: across seven models, clean success averaged 0.979 while success under corrupted or missing returned evidence averaged 0.455, with no model above 0.60.