Peizhi Niu, Ge Shi, Vaibhav Gorde, Sarthak Ghosh, Christos Faloutsos, Min Cheng, Kevin Chen
LLM agents struggle to automate complex enterprise procedures because static, pre-built harness cannot capture proprietary policies, undocumented behaviors, or state-dependent recovery paths that surface only during execution. Procedural memory accrued from agent experience offers a training-free path to closing this gap -- yet unlike episodic records or semantic facts, it must consolidate repeated successes and diagnosed failures into reusable actions and recovery strategies. We introduce WASP-Mem (Wiki-based Agent-Synthesized Procedural Memory), a nimble but effective method that distills execution traces and feedback into persistent, interlinked wiki pages, enabling continual agent learning. On TheAgentCompany benchmark, WASP-Mem raises the checkpoint pass rate by 4.6-6.1% over the strongest baseline we compared across three models while requiring 57-61% less storage. We further present a systematic controlled study spanning consolidation method, feedback type, trace ingestion scope, and refinement rounds. Our results reveal that prescriptive knowledge organization such as human defined schemas and explicit deduplication rules hurts performance rather than closing the procedural-knowledge gap. In contrast, human diagnosis converts failed traces into corrective knowledge and drives sustained improvement: a single round of human diagnosis outperforms four rounds of self-judgment by 7.0-10.9%. These findings point to a simple division of labor: let agents organize procedural memory, and invest human effort where it matters most -- diagnosis.
Rongzhe Wei, Ge Shi, Min Cheng, Sarthak Ghosh, Vaibhav Gorde, Leman Akoglu, Pan Li, Na Zhang
Enterprises increasingly want LLM agents to automate standard operating procedures over their software stacks -- mapping each step of a procedure to the right call among thousands of internal APIs, without hand-authored step-to-API mappings. The core difficulty is API selection at scale: choosing and composing the correct tools over a long horizon, judged only by whether the overall task succeeds. Current tool-use benchmarks do not test this regime -- they expose only a handful of tools, evaluate single-step invocation, or grade multi-step behavior with subjective LLM-as-a-judge scores that penalize valid alternative trajectories. We introduce SLATE (Synthetic Large-scale API Toolkit for E-commerce), a large-scale benchmark that tests large-toolset, long-horizon API selection in a realistic enterprise domain. SLATE couples (i) queries decomposed into hierarchical, tool-grounded procedures over a ~1,000-tool e-commerce library, (ii) a deterministic, context-aware simulator that returns recorded outputs for matching calls and default responses otherwise, and (iii) an end-to-end task-success metric -- a task succeeds when it reaches every reference outcome -- that credits diverse-but-valid trajectories while remaining fully automatic and reproducible. Experiments with six open decision models and the language models they are built on, from 3B to 12B parameters, show that even the best model completes only 5.0% of the tasks, establishing SLATE as a challenging testbed for reliable enterprise tool use. We release SLATE, its simulator, and the evaluation harness at https://geshijoker.github.io/slate/
Huanyue Liao, Seok Min Lim, Yan Ling Lim, Shi Min Cheng, Kellin Pelrine, Chen Hui Ong
AI companion chatbots are increasingly used by vulnerable individuals, including adolescents in suicidal crisis, for emotional support. Existing safety evaluations focus on base models, leaving gaps in product-level assessment, crisis-stage sensitivity, and comparisons between companion apps and general-purpose LLMs. We introduce MIRROR-Eval (Multi-turn Interaction Risk Review: Observing suicidal-crisis Responses), a dataset of 960 annotated 20-turn conversations across eight deployed platform configurations, six clinically grounded personas, and two crisis stages: ideation and explicit planning. An LLM-as-a-Judge pipeline applies an expert-reviewed rubric covering user risk severity, chatbot risk awareness, and intervention behavior. We observe a three-tier harm structure: companion apps (Character.AI and Replika) and Grok 4.3 form a high-harm tier; Gemini 3.1 Pro is mid-range; GPT-5.5 and Claude Sonnet 5 show substantially lower harm. At planning, companion apps show increased glorification and normalisation, advancement toward harmful action, and harmful methods and instructions. Crisis recognition and empathetic language do not ensure safe responses. These findings highlight the need for product-level safety evaluation across crisis stages. Dataset and code: https://huggingface.co/datasets/imda-biztech/MIRROR-Eval. Warning: this paper includes examples that may be offensive or harmful.