Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on external skills, but routing user requests over large skill registries is difficult because many skills are functionally redundant while complex tasks often require complementary skill sets. Existing skill routers typically rank candidates independently by query relevance, which can waste context budget on redundant skills. We propose Diverse Skill Routing (DSR), a diversity-aware reranking framework that uses a Determinantal Point Process to balance relevance and non-redundancy. DSR introduces a query-residual diversity kernel that penalizes redundant skill overlap while reducing penalties caused only by shared query relevance. On the SkillRouter benchmark, DSR improves recall and full coverage over a strong pointwise reranking baseline, with larger gains on multi-skill queries. These results suggest that skill routing should be treated not only as relevance ranking, but also as complementary set selection.
Figures & tables
Recall
Full Coverage
Method
@10
@20
@50
@10
@20
@50
All queries (75)
SkillRouter
.705
.754
.754
.520
.560
.560
DSR
.712
.768
.808
.527
.573
.633
Multi-skill (51)
SkillRouter
.659
.704
.704
.424
.458
.458
Table 1: Full-pipeline results on the SkillRouter benchmark. Both methods use SR-Emb-0.6B retrieval and SR-Rank-0.6B relevance scores. SkillRouter applies pointwise reranking, while DSR applies query-residual DPP selection. For SkillRouter, Recall@50 and Full Coverage@50 equal the corresponding @20 values because its released output is truncated at 20. Bold indicates the best result in each column.
Kernel
Quality
R@10
Multi-FC@10
Pointwise baseline
–
Reranker quality
.705
.424
Standard cosine kernel
Cosine
Embedding quality
.540
.178
Cosine
Reranker quality
.534
.254
Query-residual kernel
Table 2: Ablation study of DSR design choices. All DSR variants use SR-Emb-0.6B retrieval over the top 50 candidates. Embedding quality uses normalized query-skill embedding similarity as qi(x) , while reranker quality uses SR-Rank-0.6B scores. R@10 is averaged over all queries; Multi-FC@10 is Full Coverage@10 on multi-skill queries.
Single-skill
Multi-skill
Method
R@10
FC@10
R@10
FC@10
Top- k retrieval
.875
.875
.630
.381
LLM ranker
.719
.719
.616
.331
SkillRouter
.875
.875
.659
.424
DSR
.875
.875
.668
.432
Table 3: Comparison of ranking and selection strategies for single-skill and multi-skill queries. Top- k retrieval ranks skills by embedding similarity without reranking. The LLM ranker uses Qwen3-8B in a zero-shot reranking setting. SkillRouter uses the learned SR-Rank-0.6B pointwise reranker. DSR applies diversity-aware selection using reranker quality and the query-residual kernel.
MRR
Recall
Full Coverage
Method
@10
@20
@50
@10
@20
@50
@10
@20
@50
All queries (75)
SkillRouter
.788
.790
.790
.705
.754
.754
.520
.560
.560
DSR
.784
.785
.785
.712
.768
.808
.527
.573
.633
Multi-skill queries (51)
SkillRouter
.792
.793
.793
.659
.704
.704
.424
.458
.458
Table 4: Full-pipeline results with MRR included as an early-precision diagnostic. Both methods use SR-Emb-0.6B retrieval and SR-Rank-0.6B relevance scores. The main paper focuses on Recall and Full Coverage because multi-skill routing requires recovering complete skill sets.
College of Software Engineering, Southeast University · School of Computer Science and Engineering, Southeast University · Department of Computer Science and Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong +1