Skip to content
Preprint

Tunable Tool-Call Rates in LLM Agents via Representation Steering

Aug 2026 · 1 citation · 31 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Whether an instruction-tuned model calls a tool can be controlled by a single linear direction in its residual stream, extracted without any training from the model's own tool-use preference signal and turned into an inference-time intervention with no prompt change.

Abstract

Deciding whether to call a tool is a core competence of an LLM agent, and a costly one to get wrong: needless calls add latency, accrue cost, and may trigger irreversible side effects, while missing calls leave the model confidently wrong on questions it could only answer through tool-calls. Models manage this balance poorly, both over-using and under-using tools. Existing methods such as post-training and prompt engineering are expensive and difficult to modify at inference time. We show that whether an instruction-tuned model calls a tool can be controlled by a single linear direction in its residual stream, extracted without any training from the model's own tool-use preference signal and turned into an inference-time intervention with no prompt change. Adding the direction with strength $\alpha$ moves the call rate monotonically from near $0\% $ to over $90\%$ while keeping calls well-formed. The steering works in both directions: dialing it down suppresses calls, and dialing it up induces new calls that land precisely on the questions the model cannot answer from its own knowledge. We also show that the direction generalizes to unseen tools with strength comparable to each tool's own direction and without favoring any specific tool choice. With live tool execution, a single sweep of the steering traces a cost/accuracy Pareto frontier and nearly doubles open-domain QA accuracy ($0.29 \! \rightarrow \! 0.56$); the same recipe transfers across a diverse range of models spanning dense, MoE, and multimodal architectures, without any training. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/YuqiChen4188/Steering-Tool-Use-Propensity.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Beyond Prompts: Measuring and Optimizing LLM Tool-Agent Harnesses

The results show that some search procedures can occasionally find large gains but still choose brittle updates, so the reliability of the chosen harness should be reported alongside average held-out lift, so the reliability of the chosen harness should be reported alongside average held-out lift.

Cen-Mia Zhao, Hai-Bo Ruan, Wen-Jie Chen et al. · 4 citations · ⚡1
Preprint Aug 2026

Getting the Parameters Right: A Difficulty-Graded Benchmark and Probe-Guided Training for LLM Tool Calls

Large language model agents derive much of their capability from tool use. Existing research on tool use has largely focused on selecting the right tool and orchestrating the order of calls. However, correctly filling the parameters of a tool call is equally critical for successful execution and has received far less a...

Guoyao Yu, Xiaoqing Sun, Ziqi Huang et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

The Bitter Lesson of Tool Calling

This work empirically compare programmatic tool calling to native JSON tool calling across 14 language models on BFCL v4 and demonstrates that programmatic tool calling is a viable and robust alternative to JSON tool calling, with performance tracking model capability across release generations.

Ishan Patel, Sahil Sen, Elias Lumer et al. · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

Long-Horizon State Tracking in LLMs: Executing MD5 through a Deep Sequence of Dependent Tool Calls

Gpt-oss-120b, a mixture-of-experts model with only $\sim$5.5B active parameters per token, carries the full state across all calls and returns the correct digest on a majority of completed runs, and localizes the residual failures by origin, separating state-carrying from arithmetic and from serving.

Dheeraj Mohandas Pai, Xian-Feng Lu · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Interface-Induced Trajectory Censoring

The observed tool-call rate is not a property of the model alone; it is a property of the model-interface stack that measures it, and the two scales separately are reported.

Wen-Bo Wang · 2 citations · ⚡1

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.