Large language models (LLMs) exhibit strong reasoning and conversational abilities, but ensuring reliable behavior in multi-turn interactions remains challenging. In many real-world applications, agents must succeed in one-shot settings where retries are impossible. Existing approaches either rely on reflection or post-hoc evaluation, which require additional attempts, or assume fully trainable models that cannot leverage proprietary LLMs. We propose an asymmetric actor-critic framework for reliable conversational agents. A powerful proprietary LLM acts as the actor, while a smaller open-source critic provides runtime supervision, monitoring the actor's actions and intervening within the same interaction trajectory. Unlike training-based actor-critic methods, our framework supervises a fixed actor operating in open-ended conversational environments. The design leverages a generation-verification asymmetry: while high-quality generation requires large models, effective oversight can often be achieved by smaller ones. We further introduce a data generation pipeline that produces supervision signals for critic fine-tuning without modifying the actor. Experiments on τ-bench and UserBench show that our approach significantly improves reliability and task success over strong single-agent baselines. Moreover, lightweight open-source critics rival or surpass larger proprietary models in the critic role, and critic fine-tuning yields additional gains over several state-of-the-art methods.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Existing actor–critic methods assume trainable actors and structured action spaces. We propose an asymmetric actor–critic framework where a lightweight open-source critic supervises a fixed proprietary actor at runtime, enabling reliable control for one-shot multi-turn conversational agents.
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Method
Refund Method
Result
Actor Only
Certificate (invalid)
Fail
Asym-AC-SFT
Gift card (correct)
Success
Appendix
Table 9: Example from τ -bench airline where the critic prevents a policy violation in refund processing.
Method
Rental Car Recommendation
Actor Only
C17 (wrong, reward = 0.0)
Asym-AC-SFT
C1 (optimal, reward = 1.0)
Appendix
Table 10: Example from UserBench T-22 where the critic corrects a suboptimal rental car recommendation.
Method
Flight Recommendation
Actor Only
F4 (wrong, reward = 0.0)
Asym-AC-SFT
F16 (optimal, reward = 1.0)
Appendix
Table 11: Example from UserBench T-33 where the critic corrects an incorrect flight recommendation.
Method
Apartment Recommendation
Actor Only
A1 (wrong, reward = 0.0)
Asym-AC-SFT
A13 (optimal, reward = 1.0)
Appendix
Table 12: Example from UserBench T-44 where the critic corrects an incorrect apartment recommendation.
Benchmark
Domain/Env
# Trajectories
# Samples
# Positive
# Negative
τ -bench
Airline
403
2363
713
1650
τ -bench
Retail
171
1184
259
925
UserBench
T-22
424
848
701
147
UserBench
T-33
345
690
548
142
UserBench
T-44
292
584
460
124
UserBench
Total
1061
2122
1709
413
Appendix
Table 13: Statistics of the generated critic training data. Each critic evaluation point in a trajectory corresponds to one training sample. Positive samples denote critic rejections, while negative samples denote approvals. For UserBench, the critic is trained on data aggregated across all environments.