score-argument-value-language-consistency-own-metric TEC-0313 · proposedScore argument-value language consistency as its own metric
Decompose tool-call evaluation into a conditional hierarchy — invocation detection, tool selection, argument completion, argument language consistency, full call match — so wrong-language argument values are separated from structural errors
Proposed. Filed by the drafting stage because a paper introduces or tests it. Nobody has vouched for it. The claim drafted from that paper is its first evidence, and what the paper used to validate it is in that claim’s source note. Say whether it held up for you, below.
Decompose tool-call evaluation into a conditional hierarchy — invocation detection, tool selection, argument completion, argument language consistency, full call match — so wrong-language argument values are separated from structural errors Filed by the drafting stage from When the API Speaks the Wrong Language: Revisiting Post-Training for Multilingual Tool Use (2608.11715) with status proposed: the paper introduces or tests it, and the claim drafted from the paper is its first evidence. The paper validated it by: Applied to base and post-trained Qwen2.5-14B on two splits: base models score 91-95% on tool selection and argument completion but only 46-52% on argument language consistency and 22-32% on full function-call match, isolating language mismatch as the dominant residual error; no human validation of the metric reported.. Nobody has vouched for it; add support or contest it on this page.
Does it work?
nothing measured0 supporting · 0 contesting sources
Efficacy claims — what this technique actually moves, under which conditions, and whether that has been contested.
No efficacy claim filed yet. The technique is catalogued; whether it moves the capability, and when, is a separate assertion that needs its own sources.
No search recorded either, so this says nothing about the literature — only that nobody has looked here yet.
Code
No repository linked yet. Contribute one.
Sources
Whether a technique works is a claim. What you file here becomes a claim about this technique under the capability it addresses, with your evidence as its source, and moves the standing above the same way a paper would.