When Does Correction Become Repair? Mechanistic Auditing of Internal Interventions in Tool-Using LLMs
Abstract
Before invoking external tools, an agentic LLM must select among a K-way action space: executing a call, seeking clarification, answering directly, or declining. While internal activation steering can alter these pre-execution decisions, conventional aggregate metrics obscure where altered states land and what collateral damage they inflict. We present SAKIKO, an auditing framework that formalizes representation repair via directional error discovery, router-conditioned intervention, destination-resolved verification, and prospectively frozen statistical licensing. Across seven LLMs on When2Call and MetaTool, channel-keyed interventions induce direction-specific net gains in five models; across three sealed evaluations, none of 59 budget-matched random directions matches calibrated target gain. Crucially, destination auditing shows that behavioral movement does not equal repair: an intervention achieving +55 net gain corrupts over half of the baseline-correct decisions it touches, and promising point estimates on Qwen3-4B and Gemma-2-9B are formally declined due to finite-sample uncertainty. SAKIKO establishes the necessity of outcome-resolved adjudication before claiming internal repair. Code: https://github.com/ruizheliUOA/mechanistic-tool-use-llm.
Community
Before invoking external tools, an agentic LLM must select among a K-way action space: executing a call, seeking clarification, answering directly, or declining. While internal activation steering can alter these pre-execution decisions, conventional aggregate metrics obscure where altered states land and what collateral damage they inflict. We present SAKIKO, an auditing framework that formalizes representation repair via directional error discovery, router-conditioned intervention, destination-resolved verification, and prospectively frozen statistical licensing. Across seven LLMs on When2Call and MetaTool, channel-keyed interventions induce direction-specific net gains in five models; across three sealed evaluations, none of 59 budget-matched random directions matches calibrated target gain. Crucially, destination auditing shows that behavioral movement does not equal repair: an intervention achieving +55 net gain corrupts over half of the baseline-correct decisions it touches, and promising point estimates on Qwen3-4B and Gemma-2-9B are formally declined due to finite-sample uncertainty. SAKIKO establishes the necessity of outcome-resolved adjudication before claiming internal repair.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- When Tools Silently Lie: Evaluating and Mitigating Blind Compliance in Tool-Augmented Data Agents (2026)
- When Should LLMs Trust Their Own Revisions? A Risk-Aware Study of Intrinsic Self-Correction (2026)
- Explicit State Elicitation Is Not Enough: A Controlled Audit of Memory-Policy Classification (2026)
- Credit Without Ground Truth: Auditing Step-Level Credit Assignment in LLM Agents Against Executed Replay (2026)
- Phantom Gains: Auditing Self-Improvement Against a Measured Null (2026)
- What Would Fix This RAG Failure? Auditing Counterfactual Response with Paired Evidence Interventions (2026)
- What Would Falsify It? A Variable Specific Evidence Standard for Mechanistic Claims About Self Explanation (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper