Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
- Stars
- 11
- Last push
- Jun 2, 2026 (15d ago)
Risk flags
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
Fangzhou Li, Pagkratios Tagkopoulos, Ilias Tagkopoulos
Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
AI agents can extend their capabilities at inference time by loading reusable skills into context, yet equipping an agent with too many skills, particularly irrelevant ones, degrades performance. As community-driven skill repositories grow, agents need a way to selectively retrieve only the most relevant skills from a large library. We present SkillFlow, the first multi-stage retrieval pipeline designed for agent ski ...
ll discovery, framing skill acquisition as an information retrieval problem over a corpus of ~36K community-contributed SKILL.md definitions indexed from GitHub. The pipeline progressively narrows a large candidate set through four stages: dense retrieval, two rounds of cross-encoder reranking, and LLM-based selection, balancing recall and precision at each stage. We evaluate SkillFlow on two coding benchmarks: SkillsBench, a benchmark of 87 tasks and 229 matched skills; and Terminal-Bench, a benchmark that provides only 89 tasks, and no matched skills. On SkillsBench, SkillFlow-retrieved skills raise Pass@1 from 9.2% to 16.4% (+78.3%, $p_{\text{adj}} = 3.64 \times 10^{-2}$), reaching 84.1% of the oracle ceiling, while on Terminal-Bench, agents readily use the retrieved skills (70.1% use rate) yet show no performance gain, revealing that retrieval alone is insufficient when the corpus lacks high-quality, executable skills for the target domain. SkillFlow demonstrates that framing skill acquisition as an information retrieval task is an effective strategy, and that the practical impact of skill-augmented agents hinges on corpus coverage and skill quality, particularly the density of runnable code and bundled artifacts.
Some benchmark signal exists in the extracted evidence, but it is not structured strongly enough yet for a confident benchmark decision.
AI agents can extend their capabilities at inference time by loading reusable skills into context, yet equipping an agent with too many skills, particularly irrelevant ones, degrades performance.
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 80/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No additional official repositories detected.
Scalable and Efficient Agent Skill Retrieval System
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Agentic tool use, Retrieval / indexing
Methods
Transformer, Retrieval-augmented generation
Domains
Large Language Models, AI Agents, Information Retrieval
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.