Large Language Model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on domain-specific skills, yet manually authoring such skills does not scale, and skills generated purely from parametric knowledge often miss critical operational pitfalls. We introduce Trace2Skill, a framework that consolidates broad execution trajectories in parallel into a unified skill directory through inductive reasoning over agent experience. Trace2Skill supports both deepening existing human-written skills and creating useful skills from weak LLM-generated drafts. Experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of Trace2Skill across diverse domains, including office workflows, math reasoning, and vision QA. Importantly, the evolved skills are not merely memorized artifacts of the trajectories used to create them: they often transfer across model scales, across model families, and to out-of-distribution settings. For example, skills evolved from Qwen3.5-35B trajectories improve a Qwen3.5-122B agent by up to 57.65 percentage points on WikiTableQuestions. Further analyses show that Trace2Skill outperforms sequential skill editing and ReasoningBank-style retrieval memories, compresses recurring failures and workarounds into standard operating procedures (SoPs), and yields portable skills that can be reused without parameter updates or test-time retrieval.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Left: sequential online skill evolution edits the skill after each incoming trace. Right: Trace2Skill analyzes many traces in parallel and hierarchically consolidates recurring lessons into one portable skill.
Figure 2: Overview of Trace2Skill’s three-stage pipeline: (1) roll out a frozen agent to collect labeled success and failure trajectories, (2) propose trajectory-level skill patches in parallel with separate error and success analysts, and (3) hierarchically merge all patches into one portable skill directory.
Skill User: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Skill User: Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
SpreadsheetBench
OOD
SpreadsheetBench
OOD
Condition
Vrf ↑
Soft ↑
Hard ↑
WikiTQ ↑
HiTab ↑
Vrf ↑
Soft ↑
Hard ↑
WikiTQ ↑
HiTab ↑
Avg ↑
Baseline (absolute scores)
No Skill
27.67
28.90
17.57
21.50
14.42
19.00
18.00
4.60
13.33
19.12
18.19
Human-Written
48.33
36.30
17.03
74.68
41.31
9.67
13.03
3.37
9.02
5.30
26.93
Parametric
26.17
36.60
17.50
23.73
17.36
20.17
13.70
3.87
20.14
13.94
19.23
Table 1: Main spreadsheet results across skill-author (evolves the skill) and skill-user (runs it at inference) models. SpreadsheetBench reports Vrf (verified), Soft (problem pass rate), and Hard (task pass rate); WikiTQ and HiTab are out-of-distribution (OOD) table-QA transfer, and Avg=(IDavg+OODavg)/2 equally weights in-distribution (ID, SpreadsheetBench) and OOD. Reference rows are absolute scores; evolved rows are signed deltas from the Human-Written (Deepening) or Parametric (Creation) baseline. Bold marks the largest absolute score per column. Per-seed standard deviations are in Table 7 .
Figure 3: Cross-family generalization on SpreadsheetBench. Gemma-4-31B-it and GPT-5.5-high each (i) evolve a skill from their own traces and (ii) run Qwen3.5-authored skills.
Table 5
Skill User: 122B
Skill User: 35B
Condition
Vrf ↑
Soft ↑
Hard ↑
Vrf ↑
Soft ↑
Hard ↑
Time ↓
Seq- B=4
59.00
40.63
20.63
26.17
22.37
7.47
∼ 15 min
Seq- B=1
61.83
44.40
25.40
26.00
23.83
10.57
∼ 60 min
Parallel (ours)
65.83
46.60
27.43
27.00
22.20
8.20
∼ 3 min
Table 4: Parallel consolidation versus sequential editing on SpreadsheetBench (same trace pool, +Error). Parallel outperforms Seq in effectiveness and efficiency. Table 9 and Table 11 show similar trend in math/VQA.
Setting
User
Vrf ↑
Soft ↑
Hard ↑
ReasoningBank ( Ouyang et al., 2026 )
122B
56.00
40.10
21.30
35B
20.50
17.30
4.97
Human-Written +Combined (ours)
122B
69.83
47.17
29.53
35B
29.67
18.80
5.73
Table 5: Trace2Skill outperforms ReasoningBank-style retrieval on SpreadsheetBench (same trajectory pool). Table 9 and Table 11 show similar trend in math/VQA.
Figure 8
Skill
Evolve
Vrf
Soft
Hard
WikiTQ
HiTab
No Selection (+Error)
68.00
65.83
46.60
27.43
76.30
43.45
BO Selection (+Error)
72.83
69.83
47.27
28.90
77.51
43.38
Table 6: BO-selected +Error patches versus applying all of them (No Selection), in the 122B Deepening spreadsheet setting. Evolve is the accuracy on evolving-set.
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Skill User: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Skill User: Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
SpreadsheetBench
OOD
SpreadsheetBench
OOD
Condition
Vrf ↑
Soft ↑
Hard ↑
WikiTQ ↑
HiTab ↑
Vrf ↑
Soft ↑
Hard ↑
WikiTQ ↑
HiTab ↑
Avg ↑
Baseline (absolute scores)
No Skill
3.75
0.90
0.70
0.81
0.67
1.80
2.77
1.25
1.27
5.28
0.42
Human-Written
8.10
1.39
0.40
0.65
0.71
2.93
0.57
0.40
0.36
2.68
0.46
Parametric
0.58
1.04
0.75
6.52
8.93
1.44
1.56
0.50
13.32
18.31
3.28
Appendix
Table 7: Standard deviations across seeds 41, 42, and 43 for the main spreadsheet results in Table 1 . Reference rows are standard deviations of absolute scores; evolved rows are standard deviations of the paired deltas defined in Table 1 . The summary metric Avg is stable (standard deviation ≤3.4 in every row), and the mean gains in Table 1 stay large relative to the per-cell spread, so the comparisons are robust. The higher variance in individual columns (Vrf and the OOD WikiTQ/HiTab transfer) is expected rather than a sign of instability: each score aggregates long agentic rollouts that often exceed 30 turns of environment interaction, so single-benchmark run-to-run stochasticity accumulates while averaging out in Avg. For conciseness, we omit additional standard-deviation tables for the paper’s other results, whose deviations are similarly small: std ranges for spreadsheet tasks are similar to this table. Std ranges of DAPO-Test, AIME’26, and DocVQA ANLS are 1.1-2.4, 1.8-3.4, and 0.034-0.139 correspondingly.
Table 11Table 12
Figure 6: Cross-model trace induction on SpreadsheetBench-Vrf (pass rate, %). Gemma-4 and GPT-5.5-high author skills from Qwen traces, which are then run by the Qwen3.5-122B user.
Skill User: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Skill User: Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
SpreadsheetBench
OOD
SpreadsheetBench
OOD
Condition
Vrf
Soft
Hard
WikiTQ
HiTab
Vrf
Soft
Hard
WikiTQ
HiTab
Avg
Skill Author: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Deepening
+Error (ours)
65.83
46.60
27.43
76.30
43.45
36.67
22.47
6.23
18.28
14.85
36.21
+Error LLM
67.00
43.93
25.23
39.81
36.68
25.00
22.43
6.23
11.24
9.74
28.00
Appendix
Table 12: Agentic error analysis (+Error) versus single-call +Error LLM, across Deepening and Creation and all 122B/35B author–user pairs. Vrf/Soft/Hard, the OOD splits (WikiTQ/HiTab), and Avg are as in Table 1 . Bold marks the better of the two methods per column.
Domain
Source traces
Held-out evaluation
Base
Trace2Skill
Gain
PDF
VRDU Registration Forms
VAREX Flat validation
76.9%
85.3%
+8.4 pp
PPTX
TSBench training traces
TSBench deck-disjoint OOD
72.5%
88.8%
+16.3 pp
DOCX
Generated document-operation tasks
OfficeBench DOCX holdout
79.7%
87.5%
+7.8 pp
Appendix
Table 13: Broader document-agent transfer. Each row evolves an official Anthropic document skill from source traces and evaluates on a held-out target domain. Base and Trace2Skill are target pass rates (%); Gain is their difference in percentage points (pp).
Figure 7: Head-to-head comparison on SpreadsheetBench-Verified (Vrf, pass rate %) with all systems using the same open base model (Qwen3.5-122B-A10B) and the held-out 200:400 test slice. Bars cover the No Skill floor, the Human-Written starting skill (dashed line), the three reproduced concurrent systems, and Trace2Skill Deepening. EvoSkill’s two bars are the same faithful reproduction differing only in agent harness (Claude Code, following original paper, vs. React, matching our setting).
User/Trace source
Deepening
Creation
Base
skill-creator
Trace2Skill +Error
Base
skill-creator
Trace2Skill +Error
122B/122B
48.33
27.33
65.83
26.17
26.67
49.00
122B/35B
48.33
19.50
65.00
26.17
18.33
27.17
35B/35B
9.67
18.50
27.00
20.17
17.67
24.00
35B/122B
9.67
28.00
36.67
20.17
27.33
28.83
Average
29.00
23.33
48.63
23.17
22.50
32.25
Appendix
Table 14: SpreadsheetBench-Verified (Vrf) comparison with Anthropic’s skill-creator baseline (pass rate, %). For each skill-user/trace-source pair, skill-creator is compared with the corresponding Base skill and Trace2Skill +Error under Deepening and Creation; the final row averages each column.
Skills are a promising way to improve LLM agent capabilities without retraining, while keeping the added procedure reusable and controllable. However, high-quality skills are still largely written by hand. We introduce SkillGen, a multi-agent framework that synthesizes a single auditable skill from trajectories generated by a base agent. The output is a human-readable artifact that can be inspected before use. Rather than merely summarizing trajectories, SkillGen leverages contrastive induction over both successful and failed trajectories to identify reusable success patterns, recurring failure modes, and behaviors that appear in nearby successes but are missing from failures. SkillGen then generates candidate skills and iteratively refines the skill. A key novelty in SkillGen is that we model agent skills as interventions to empirically verify the net effect of skills on the overall performance. Specifically, we compare outcomes on the same instances with and without the skill, so that we account for both repairs (cases where the skill fixes a baseline failure) and regressions (cases where the skill breaks a baseline success). Across a broad range of agents and datasets, SkillGen consistently improves held-out performance, outperforms existing skill-generation baselines, and produces skills that transfer across models.
Yuchen Ma, Yue Huang, Han Bao +5
Munich Center for Machine Learning, LMU Munich · University of Notre Dame · Microsoft Research
Large language model (LLM) agents can induce skills from completed tasks and reuse them later to grow more capable with experience. In practice, induced skills may transfer unreliably and can even harm the agent that retrieves them. When agent-induced skills transfer reliably across tasks remains an open question. We conduct a comprehensive and controlled study of how the way skills are induced shapes their transfer across tasks. Specifically, we compare task-level with subtask-level skill induction and text with code skill formats, the two axes along which existing methods differ. Task-level skills mostly reduce the agent's performance below its no-memory baseline while subtask-level skills raise it above on average, and text skills transfer better than code skills. To further understand our findings, we examine two complementary properties of the induced skills: specificity, which measures how closely a skill matches real tasks, and abstractness, which measures how evenly its relevance spreads across tasks. Neither property alone predicts task success, but their combined effect does, which we propose as a skill utility score. The score correlates consistently with task success when skills are transferred, and subtask-level and text skills score higher. Computing skill utility only needs the skills and task descriptions, so our score serves as a lightweight diagnostic of a skill memory for practitioners.
Skill documents, structured natural-language instructions that guide Large Language Model (LLM) agents, are critical to modern agent frameworks, yet LLMs struggle to write skills that actually work. On SkillsBench, human-authored skills improve pass rates by 16.2 percentage points, while LLM-authored skills provide no measurable gain. We introduce SkillAxe, a fully unsupervised framework that enables LLMs to iteratively diagnose and refine their own skills. SkillAxe decomposes skill quality into four interpretable dimensions (quality impact, trigger precision, instruction compliance with fault attribution, and solution-path coverage), producing structured improvement briefs that require no ground-truth labels, test suites, or environment rewards. On SkillsBench, SkillAxe improves pass rates by 28% relative over unimproved LLM skills and closes 47--67% of the gap to human-authored skills. We validate the approach as a continuous improvement engine in the wild on SpreadsheetBench, where a SkillAxe-built skill library learns from past agent trajectories and raises pass rate from 16.0% to 52.0% using only 22 skills.