Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

RAG Strategies for Natural Language-Based SQL Query and REST API Call Generation

Tim Schlippe, Simon Martin, Michael MarketsmüllerPublished Feb 6, 2026
arXiv PDF
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Missing
Not verified yet
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: AI-core · Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.

Enterprise software systems commonly expose functionality through relational databases and REST APIs, requiring users to understand schemas, endpoints, and parameters. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) can support natural language interfaces by grounding large language models (LLMs) in enterprise-specific documentation. We evaluate three training-free RAG configurations - Standard RAG, Relevance Filtering RAG, and Iterative Retrieval RAG - for SQL query generation, REST API call generation, and a combined task requiring routing between both operation types. Using SAP Transactional Banking, we constructed an expert-reviewed dataset with mock execution screening and compared the configurations under database-only, API-only, and mixed-documentation settings. Without retrieval, exact match accuracy is 0% across all tasks, whereas retrieval achieves mock execution success of up to 79.30% and component match accuracy of up to 78.86%. In the combined task, Iterative Retrieval RAG achieves higher exact match accuracy than Standard RAG (10.29% vs. 7.45%), with similar mock execution success (68.93% vs. 67.10%). However, for REST API call generation under mixed documentation, Iterative Retrieval RAG achieves lower mock execution success than Standard RAG (50.53% vs. 75.79%). Overall, retrieval-control strategies show task- and metric-dependent behavior under mixed-documentation settings.

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: hot
Enterprise software systems commonly expose functionality through relational databases and REST APIs, requiring users to understand schemas, endpoints, and parameters.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Oct 26, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

Tasks

Retrieval / indexing

Methods

Transformer, Retrieval-augmented generation

Domains

Natural Language Processing, Information Retrieval

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers