
Standalone and Agentic LLMs
A standalone model answers once and stops. An agentic system runs a loop that thinks, decides, acts, observes, and revises. This enables multistep goals, tool use, memory, and collaboration. For methods see ReAct, Reflexion, and Tree of Thoughts.
| Dimension | Standalone LLM | Agentic LLM |
|---|---|---|
| Control loop | Single forward pass from prompt to response | Plan then act then observe then revise |
| Actions and tools | Text only | Structured tool calls, code execution, browsing, and file IO, see Toolformer and Function Calling |
| Memory and state | Context window only | Episodic logs and long term memory with retrieval and reflection, see Generative Agents and MemGPT |
| Planning | Inline next token prediction | Search over thoughts and retrieval augmented planning, see RAP and MCTS AHD |
| Evaluation | Static question answering | Interactive benchmarks for web, operating systems, and software engineering, see SWE bench and WebArena |
A Simple Task, Two Ways
Example query to an LLM: Fix the failing tests in this open source repository, write a minimal patch, and open a pull request with a clear summary.
Standalone model
- Reads the prompt and returns a text suggestion
- Cannot run tests or edit files
- Relies on the user to copy edits and verify the result
Agentic system
- Plans steps and picks tools
- Runs tests, reads error traces, edits files, and reruns tests
- Writes the patch summary and opens the pull request
Memory and State
Agentic LLMs benefit from memory beyond the current context. A useful pattern is a two tier design. Keep a small set of core memories in context and a larger store outside the model. Retrieve by similarity, recency, and importance. See MemGPT and the production framework Letta.
- Episodic memory and reflection. Store observations and actions, then summarize and abstract. See Generative Agents.
- Dynamic organization. Link related memories and let new memories update older ones. See A MEM.
- Practical tips. Separate user profile, project knowledge, and tool history. Age memories that are stale. Log tool inputs and outputs for provenance.
How to Evaluate Agentic LLMs
Prefer execution based tasks over static questions. Measure success, safety, and efficiency.
Benchmarks that matter
- Software engineering. SWE bench Verified shows that careful scaffolds and verification reveal stronger coding ability than earlier setups.
- Web agents. WebArena and VisualWebArena evaluate realistic browsing and visually grounded tasks.
- Computer use. OSWorld runs tasks across desktop systems and reports a large gap between human and agent success.
- Safety. SafeAgentBench and Agent SafetyBench test rejection of hazardous requests and safe planning.
- Browsing. See BrowseComp for a focused measure of web navigation and retrieval.
Tool Calling
When ChatGPT browses the web to answer a question, that is tool calling in action. The model outputs a <tool_calling> marker, or a function call object, the runtime pauses, runs a web search, returns the results into context, and the model continues the answer.
This pattern became popular with Toolformer, which showed how to teach models when to call a tool and how to fill arguments, rather than calling everything all the time.
In agentic systems, tool calls are how LLMs act. The system invokes APIs, runs code, queries a database, or reads and writes files, then observes the outcome and takes the next step. That turns a one shot reply into a simple loop, plan then act then observe then revise.
How to train
Supervised finetuning and RL with human or AI feedback shape both the decision to call and the argument schema. Datasets include structured function calling pairs, for example xlam function calling 60k.
query: Where can I find live giveaways for beta access and games?
answer: [{"name": "live_giveaways_by_type", "arguments": {"type": "beta"}}, {"name": "live_giveaways_by_type", "arguments": {"type": "game"}}]
Tools: [{"name": "live_giveaways_by_type", "description": "Retrieve live giveaways from the GamerPower API based on the specified type.", "parameters": {"type": {"description": "The type of giveaways to retrieve (e.g., game, loot, beta).", "type": "str", "default": "game"}}}]
Practical notes
- Structured outputs via JSON schema reduce parsing errors, see Structured Outputs.
- Parallel tool calls can reduce latency, see Anthropic Tool Use.
- Use sandboxes and least privilege scopes for code and browsers, see Governing Agentic AI.
- Interfaces matter. Agent computer interfaces improve results, see SWE agent.
- Browsing with citation rewards gives cleaner outputs, see WebGPT.
Planning
Another important agentic characteristic is to make goal driven autonomous decisions without the user giving a step by step guide. This is unlocked with chain of thought reasoning. Thinking out loud in a multistep way gives the model context about what to do next, which is exactly what a plan is.
How to train
Reinforcement learning can reward both the outcome and the reasoning process. See Chain of Thought as Policy.

Outcome reward and process reward
Patterns that work in practice
- ReAct interleaves reasoning and actions, see ReAct.
- Reflexion uses self reflection across attempts, see Reflexion.
- Tree of Thoughts branches and self evaluates, see Tree of Thoughts.
- Retrieval augmented planning pulls in prior experience, see RAP.
- Search with MCTS gives stronger global optimization, see MCTS AHD.
Coding Abilities
Most applications today automate software workflows, so coding skill matters. For how labs train models to excel at coding see StarCoder 3. This involves changes at every stage.
Tokenization
Special tokens support code tasks. For example, <|endoftext|> marks the end of a sequence. <|fim_prefix|>, <|fim_middle|>, and <|fim_suffix|> enable Fill in the Middle. <|fim_pad|> is for padding. <|repo_name|> identifies repositories, and <|file_sep|> separates files for repository level learning.
Pretraining
Mix general language data with code specific data. Use public repositories, pull requests, commits, notebooks, and Kaggle sets. Balance code, math, and text for a coding oriented base model.
File level pretraining
Learn from single files.
<|fim_prefix|>{code_pre}<|fim_suffix|>{code_suf}<|fim_middle|>{code_mid}<|endoftext|>
Repository level pretraining
Extend context across many files and learn project structure.
<|repo_name|>{repo_name}
<|file_sep|>{file_path1}
{file_content1}
<|file_sep|>{file_path2}
{file_content2}
<|file_sep|>{file_path3}
<|fim_prefix|>{code_pre}<|fim_suffix|>{code_suf}<|fim_middle|>{code_fim}<|endoftext|>
Instruction finetuning
Stage one uses many diverse but lower quality instructions. Stage two adds filtered high quality data with rejection sampling and supervised finetuning.
RL with execution feedback
For algorithmic tasks, run tests for correctness in Python, Java, and other languages. For complex snippets, use LLM as a judge.
Agentic coding in practice
- SWE bench resolves real issues and requires patches that pass tests, see SWE bench.
- SWE agent gives the model a usable computer interface, see SWE agent.
- Fill in the Middle improves code infilling and editing, see OpenAI FIM.
Safety and Governance
- Use least privilege tools and scopes. Start read only and ask before escalation, see Governing Agentic AI.
- Sandbox code and browsers. Use network allow lists and secrets isolation, see Claude Code Security.
- Add verifiers before actions and auditors after actions. Keep tool logs with provenance. Structured outputs help, see Structured Outputs.
Conclusion
So in conclusion, for an LLM to be agentic, it needs to be good at coding, and good at knowing when, plan, and how, tool usage, to call code for execution.
