Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Feedback That Backfires: Why Small Language Model Agents Repeat the Call They Just Watched Fail

Agent harnesses record a failed tool call and its error message in the transcript and ask the model to continue, on the assumption that the error is corrective information. We measure whether it is. Defining the corrective gain of a failure record as the change in log-probability of re-emitting the action that just failed, we find the gain is negative for every instruction-tuned model we tested (6 checkpoints, 135M-1.7B, 4 families) in two environments: simulated tool calling and MBPP program repair. Normalised by action length the effect is about -1.03 nats per action token, a factor of 2.8 in the odds of each token, and holds on 90%-100% of individual items, not only on average. Over a ...

AuthorsEsmail Gumaan
Primary categorycs.SE
Published24 August 2026
Last updated at source24 August 2026
cs.SEcs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/e43716d5-a3ff-49e3-97a3-d0cd84961c7e" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.