Pushing the Limits of LLM Tool Calling via Experiential Knowledge Integration and Activation

Tool use extends large language models beyond parametric knowledge, but reliable execution requires balancing appropriate reasoning depth with strict structural validity. We approach this problem from a case-based perspective to present CAST, a case-driven framework that treats historical execution trajectories as structured cases. Instead of reusing raw exemplar outputs, CAST extracts case-derived signals to identify complexity profiles for estimating optimal reasoning strategies, alongside failure profiles to map likely structural breakdowns. The framework translates this knowledge into a fine-grained reward design and adaptive reasoning, enabling the model to autonomously internalize case-based strategies during reinforcement learning. Experiments on BFCLv2 and ToolBench demonstrate that CAST improves both schema-faithful execution and task-level tool-use success while reducing unnecessary deliberation. The approach achieves up to 5.85 percentage points gain in overall execution accuracy and reduces average reasoning length by 26%, significantly mitigating high-impact structural errors. Ultimately, this demonstrates how historical execution cases can provide reusable adaptation knowledge for calibrated tool use.

Tool-augmented reasoning has become a popular direction for LLM-based agents, and it is widely assumed to improve reasoning and reliability. However, we demonstrate that this consensus does not always hold: in the presence of semantic distractors, tool-augmented reasoning does not necessarily outperform native CoT. To explain this performance gap, we propose a Factorized Intervention Framework that isolates the cost of prompt formatting, the overhead of the tool-calling protocol, and the actual gain from executing tools. Our analysis reveals a critical tradeoff: under semantic noise, the gains from tools often fail to offset the "tool-use tax", which is the performance degradation introduced by the tool-calling protocol itself. To address this, we introduce G-STEP, a lightweight inference-time gate to mitigate protocol-induced errors. While this yields partial recovery, our findings suggest that more substantial improvements still require strengthening the model's intrinsic reasoning and tool-interaction capabilities.

Experience learning has achieved promising results in enhancing LLM agent planning and reasoning by integrating past interactions as reusable knowledge. However, existing methods remain confined to explicit text space, retrieving experiences via semantic similarity and concatenating them into the context window, leading to substantial token overhead and a decoupled architecture that separates retrieval from generation. To address these limitations, we propose ExpWeaver, a framework that enables LLM agents to learn from experience via latent retrieval-augmented generation, without requiring a separate RAG module. ExpWeaver encodes experiences using the LLM's own hidden states, retrieves relevant experiences directly in latent space at each decoding step, and integrates them through cross-attention aggregation and gated residual mechanisms. The entire pipeline is optimized end-to-end with reinforcement learning, supporting both generative and ranking tasks. We evaluate ExpWeaver on 13 diverse tasks spanning question answering, reasoning, coding, scientific prediction, and recommendation. Results demonstrate that ExpWeaver achieves state-of-the-art performance on 12 out of 13 tasks, outperforming the strongest baseline by over 6.8%; maintains token efficiency comparable to non-retrieval baselines while text-based retrieval methods require 1.5 to 2 times more tokens; and exhibits superior cross-domain generalization, outperforming the strongest baseline by 16.32% under zero-shot transfer and 15.21% under few-shot transfer. Our code for ExpWeaver is released at https://github.com/ulab-uiuc/ExpWeaver.