TROVE: Adaptive Agent Skill Orchestration via Trace-Grounded Route Validation and Editing
Abstract
Agents tend to optimize, select, or constrain execution structures before decisive runtime outcomes are observed. However, such pre-execution commitment creates an orchestration bottleneck: when intermediate evidence invalidates the pending continuation, agents must either execute stale steps or replan broadly, compounding errors, wasting computation, and discarding progress. We thus propose Trace-grounded Route Orchestration via Validation and Editing (TROVE), which revises only what runtime evidence invalidates. Offline, TROVE distills evaluated workflow-search traces into atomic and composite skills and an outcome-conditioned transition graph, preserving stable fragments while exposing outcome-dependent decisions. Online, it treats a planned route as provisional: after committing one top-level skill, the controller retains a valid continuation, inserts a trace-supported local response, or replaces only the invalid suffix. Evaluation across code-generation, question-answering, and math reasoning benchmarks with different LLM backbones show that TROVE delivers a stronger quality-efficiency trade-off than existing baselines of dataset-level optimization, query-level architecture selection, and graph-constrained scheduling. Quality gains are largest when outcomes change the appropriate continuation, whereas early termination yields substantial efficiency gains on near-saturated tasks. Ablations further show that composite skills capture most offline benefits, insertion enables local correction, and suffix replacement primarily improves efficiency. These findings establish selective route editing as a general principle for adaptive agent orchestration.
Figures & tables
| Backbone | Method | Code | QA | Math | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HumanEval | MBPP | DROP | HotpotQA | MATH | GSM8K | ||||||||
| Score | Time | Score | Time | Score | Time | Score | Time | Score | Time | Score | Time | ||
| DeepSeek-V4-Flash | AFlow ( Zhang et al. 2025b ) | 93.89 | 21.75 | 91.79 | 43.10 | 88.50 | 15.56 | 78.58 | 25.41 | 74.07 | 68.88 | 96.02 | 57.73 |
| MaAS ( Zhang et al. 2025a ) | 87.02 | 13.52 | 81.82 | 35.13 | 81.64 | 22.98 | 77.37 | 26.60 | 68.11 | 131.83 | 96.68 | 108.23 | |
| LAS ( Xiang et al. 2026 ) | 94.66 | 13.81 | 92.08 | 22.02 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Our TROVE | 97.71 | 8.10 | 93.55 | 12.63 | 90.39 | 14.89 | 80.16 | 23.97 | 80.86 | 26.08 | 97.16 | 9.63 | |
| Variant | Accuracy (%) | Time (min) |
|---|---|---|
| Full TROVE | 92.37 | 24.36 |
| Without Offline | 77.86 | 33.62 |
| Without Composite | 78.63 | 33.30 |
| Without Insert | 82.44 | 39.10 |
| Without Replace | 90.84 | 40.15 |
LLM Agent Orchestration
Large language model agent orchestration coordinates models, tools, and workflows to complete complex tasks reliably and efficiently.
See all 463 papers