PreprintCited by 1Reinforcement Learning in RoboticsAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningRobot Manipulation and Learning

SkillMaster: Toward Autonomous Skill Mastery in LLM Agents

Open access
Yang, Min, Piao, Jinghua, Xia, Xu, Lan, Xiaochong, Chen, Jiaju, Gong, Yongshun, Li, Yong·2026·arXiv

Abstract

Skills provide an effective mechanism for improving LLM agents on complex tasks, yet in existing agent frameworks, their creation, refinement, and selection are typically governed by external teachers, hand-designed rules, or auxiliary modules. As a result, skills remain external resources to be invoked, rather than capabilities that agents can develop, adapt, and internalize through experience. To endow LLM agents with autonomous skill mastery, we propose SkillMaster, a training framework that teaches agents to create new skills, refine existing skills, and select accumulated skills during task solving. This capability is achieved through three key designs. First, we train agents through trajectory-informed skill review, teaching agents to propose, update, or retain skills based on evidence from completed episodes. Second, each candidate skill edit is designed to be evaluated by its counterfactual utility on related probe tasks, providing a direct learning signal for training skill-editing decisions. Third, we introduce DualAdv-GRPO, which separately estimates advantages for task-solving actions and skill-editing decisions, stabilizing joint training across task solving and skill management. Experiments on ALFWorld and WebShop show that SkillMaster improves the overall success rate over state-of-the-art baselines by 8.8% and 9.3%, respectively, achieving the best performance among all compared methods. Further analysis reveals a marked shift in agent capability: agents trained with SkillMaster can identify skill failures, refine procedural knowledge from trajectory evidence, and transfer improvements to future tasks with limited skill-bank edits. Overall, SkillMaster moves LLM agents beyond mere skill use toward self-improving agents capable of developing, adapting, and applying their own skill repertoires.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2605.08693

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • SkillMaster trains the agent to create, refine, and select skills itself rather than delegating those operations to external teachers or hand-designed rules.

    “SkillMaster goes furthest, training the agent to create, refine, and select skills itself rather than delegating those operations to external teachers or hand-designed rules”

    From Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops (2026) · cites this paper as [75]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yang, M., Piao, J., Xia, X., Lan, X., Chen, J., Gong, Y., & Li, Y.
Affiliations
  • Shandong University (CN)
  • Tsinghua University (CN)
  • Southeast University (CN)
  • University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7160902796
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
Keywords
LLM agents, skill acquisition, skill refinement, skill selection, advantage estimation, skills management, self-improving agents, ALFWorld, WebShop

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review