Skip to content
Preprint

Don't Solve, Just Compare: Tiny Advisors for Runtime Intervention in LLM Agents

Aug 2026 · 2 citations · 49 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Comparison-Only Tiny Advisor (COTA), a comparison-only framework for constructive runtime intervention that shows that constructive runtime intervention can remain effective even when the auxiliary model has substantially weaker task-solving capability than the actor.

Abstract

LLM agents are emerging as an important paradigm for real-world tasks that require reasoning, tool use, and sequential decision-making. As these agents operate over longer horizons, runtime intervention offers a way to improve reliability without retraining the underlying actor. Effective intervention must provide a useful direction for recovery besides a warning. Existing approaches often rely on an expert solver or a critic that generates task-specific corrections, incurring either the cost of another capable solver or the capacity demands of a task-capable critic. We introduce Comparison-Only Tiny Advisor (COTA) for constructive runtime intervention, which reduces the learned intervention role to local action comparison. A lightweight comparator judges the actor's proposal against available alternatives, and preferred alternatives are returned as non-binding advice for replanning. The comparator is trained from same-prefix counterfactual branches. Across WebShop, ALFWorld, and tau^3-Retail with three LLM actors, COTA instantiated with a 0.5B comparator consistently improves the original actor and achieves the strongest overall performance--cost trade-off among the compared methods. These results suggest that effective runtime intervention need not itself be a task-solving problem: the intervention role can be separated from task solving and handled by a lightweight model specialized for local comparison.

View source

Similar papers

Review Aug 2026

Argus: A General-Purpose Agentic Reasoning Runtime for Long-Horizon Tasks

Results show that a fixed-weight, self-evolving harness can revise, recover, and accumulate verified approaches while producing structured trajectories for future supervised and reinforcement learning.

Boxiu Li, Zi-Mo Wen, Yi-Jia Fan et al. · 2 citations · ⚡1
Preprint Aug 2026

Don't Overthink, Don't Underthink: Toward Adaptive Reasoning in Agentic AI

It is argued that a major challenge for next-generation agentic AI is not merely how much reasoning a language model should perform, but how it should allocate reasoning according to evolving task demands, to motivate future research on adaptive reasoning mechanisms for agentic AI.

Md. Jueal Mia, M. Amini · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

KC-Bench: A Dynamic Interactive Benchmark for Evaluating Knowledge Conflicts in LLM Agents

KC-Bench is introduced, a controlled multi-turn benchmark for measuring model-level behavior across world-knowledge conflicts, input inconsistencies, and multi-source temporal conflicts, and provides a reproducible diagnostic for developing conflict-aware reasoning and execution safeguards.

Yaxing Lyu, Sheng-Jie Zhou, B. Toh et al. · 1 citation
Jul 2026

AgentAbstain: Do LLM Agents Know When Not to Act?

This work presents the first systematic evaluation framework for agentic abstention, and identifies failure modes such as post-hoc abstention, in which agents execute irreversible actions before recognizing abstention triggers.

Xun Liu, Y. Zhang, Vira Kasprova et al. · 2 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Online Monitoring and Corrective Steering of Programming Agents

LivePlan decouples judging from advising: a deterministic, rule-based monitor examines general signals over the trajectory to detect issues without invoking an LLM, and only when an issue is detected does it consult an advisor LLM for a high-level, next-step correction.

Shuyang Liu, Saman Dehghan, Ji Young Kim et al. · 1 citation

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