Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Judges Follow the Reference: The Derivation Gap in Verifying Tool-Call Arguments

Tool-call judges evaluate argument values proposed by LLM agents. We find that they accept a correct value less often when their input holds no reference for it, that is, no text that says what the value should be. This happens when the value is a default value from the function schema that the user did not mention, when it has to be inferred, or when the text it comes from was cut from the judge input. We call this drop in acceptance the derivation gap. It appears across all seven judges we evaluate, including System One models CLM and Jev. The gap is not only a truncation artifact: correct default values have the largest gap on a benchmark with no truncation. A controlled source-relocat...

AuthorsLinhai Ma, Yan Wang, Lingfei Qian et al.
Primary categorycs.AI
Published13 October 2026
Last updated at source13 October 2026
cs.AIcs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/3ef6a5a2-f115-49ce-a644-14c837374530" 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 Information may be incomplete or out of date.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 15 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.