Reasoner-Executor-Synthesizer: Scalable Agentic Architecture with Static O(1) Context Window

Agentic RAG systems that equip language models with dozens to hundreds of tool definitions face a critical resource conflict: tool schemas consume the same context window needed for retrieval-augmented generation. We present the first systematic study of this tool-context trade-off, evaluating 14 models spanning 1.5B-32B local models plus one frontier API model across 6,566 controlled API calls at three context budgets (8K, 16K, 32K) with 28 tool definitions. Applying TSCG conservative-profile compression (44-50% schema token savings), we observe a binary enablement effect: at 8K tokens, JSON-schema tool definitions overflow the context window entirely, yielding near-zero EM (2.6% average), while compressed schemas restore RAG functionality with +20.5 pp average exact-match lift across all eight models (+24.7 pp among the six exhibiting full enablement). At 32K -- where both formats fit -- four of five tested models show delta <= 1 pp, confirming the effect is purely budget-driven. External validation on HotpotQA (50 multi-hop questions) shows +48 pp EM under the same overflow scenario. Frontier scaling tests demonstrate that JSON schemas overflow at ~494 tools while compressed schemas remain operational beyond 800 tools. Our results establish tool-schema compression as a necessary infrastructure layer for agentic RAG in constrained-context deployments. All code, data, and checkpoints are publicly available.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has become a standard approach for enhancing large language models (LLMs) with external knowledge, mitigating hallucinations, and improving factuality. However, existing systems rely on generating natural language queries at each hop and maintaining a strict architectural separation between retriever and generator, preventing them from leveraging the full representational capacity of the LLM. We propose LAnR (Latent Abstraction for RAG), a unified framework in which a single LLM jointly performs encoding, retrieval, and generation entirely within its own latent space. Rather than generating textual queries, LAnR produces dense retrieval vectors from the hidden states of a designated [PRED] token and uses them to match against encoded document representations from the same model. Furthermore, LAnR adaptively decides when sufficient evidence has been retrieved using a lightweight MLP control head over those same hidden states, eliminating both the separate retriever and explicit token-level stopping reasoning. This design is motivated by our empirical observation that answer token entropy reliably signals retrieval sufficiency. Extensive experiments on six QA benchmarks spanning single-hop and multi-hop settings demonstrate that LAnR outperforms existing RAG methods, while achieving improved inference efficiency through reduced number of retrieval calls and tighter model integration.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a widely used approach for grounding large language models (LLMs) in external knowledge. However, configuring a pipeline is an expensive hyperparameter optimization problem over many interacting choices, from chunking and embedding model to reranking and generation. Existing optimizers, from greedy search to Bayesian optimization, reduce each trial to an aggregate score and search without modeling why a configuration performed as it did, even though the retrieved chunks already provide evidence about whether each failure occurred during retrieval or after it. We introduce Agentic AutoRAG, an LLM-agent optimizer for multi-objective RAG hyperparameter optimization with retrieval-versus-generation failure attribution. It proposes configurations scored on a frozen exam from the corpus: after each trial a Diagnoser attributes each failed question to retrieval or generation, and a Proposer, grounded in a knowledge base of model rankings and pricing, selects the next configuration, weighing accuracy against cost to trace a Pareto frontier. On three multi-hop QA benchmarks it reaches higher LLM-judge accuracy than every baseline we compare, and within its first 10 trials it matches or beats the statistical baselines' full 30-trial judge accuracy. In its cost-aware mode on a real-world healthcare corpus it reaches a median exam accuracy of 77%, above the strongest baseline's 71.5%, at about 58% of that baseline's cost per query, and it matches that 71.5% at about 22% of the cost.