SkillGate: Training In-Policy Skill Selection in Long-Horizon Agents
Abstract
SkillGate fixes selector credit starvation in agent skill selection by separating outcome credit for execution tokens from local advantage for skill-naming tokens, improving success rates and reducing misleading skill exposure.
Agent frameworks increasingly package procedural knowledge as skills: instruction files an agent reads on demand, while public libraries now hold thousands of them. Which skill to read has thus become a decision the policy itself makes in the middle of an episode, yet no existing signal trains it. We show that the default remedy, outcome-rewarded RL over the candidate slate, cannot teach it, for a structural reason we identify and name selector credit starvation: under a broadcast, sequence-level advantage, the few tokens that name the chosen skill carry a vanishing share of the loss, and the credit they inherit is increasingly wrong-signed as trajectories lengthen. A correct choice is punished whenever the execution after it fails, even though the choice itself is among the most valuable decisions in the trajectory. Auditing a completed run's own training artifacts confirms all three properties, each worsening monotonically with horizon. SkillGate removes the failure by construction: it partitions the token support into two disjoint credit channels, outcome credit reaching only execution tokens, and a separate action-local advantage reaching exactly the skill-naming tokens, positive only when a trajectory's single read is the correct one. On five agentic benchmarks under a 16-candidate slate, SkillGate lifts a 9B policy from 40.8% to 53.2% trial success, well ahead of the identical budget spent on outcome reward alone, while cutting exposure to misleading candidates by two thirds and reading fewer skills.
Community
We introduce SkillGate, a training method for in-policy skill selection in long-horizon agents. It addresses selector credit starvation by separating outcome credit for execution tokens from an action-local advantage applied only to skill-naming tokens. On five agentic benchmarks with a 16-candidate slate, SkillGate improves a 9B policy from 40.8% to 53.2% trial success while reducing exposure to misleading skills by two thirds.
I've watched agents pick the wrong skill file and burn tokens retrying — so the selector credit starvation framing lands. The few tokens that name the skill carry a vanishing share of the sequence-level loss, so outcome-rewarded RL just shrugs when the selector misfires. That's a testable claim, which is what I like about it. I'd run the same candidate slate with a policy getting a dense signal on the selection step itself and see whether long-horizon success actually moves. If it doesn't, the bottleneck was never selection — it's downstream execution, and no amount of credit reassignment fixes that.
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2608.18852 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 1
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