160+ pages covering the most important research around context engineering for LLMs.
This is a must-read!
Here are my notes:
The paper provides a taxonomy of context engineering in LLMs categorized into foundational components, system implementations, evaluation methodologies, and future directions.
The context engineering evolution timeline from 2020 to 2025 involves foundational RAG systems to complex multi-agent architectures.
The work distinguishes prompt engineering from context engineering on dimensions like state, scalability, error analysis, complexity, etc.
Context engineering components include context retrieval and generation, context processing, context management, and how they are all integrated into systems implementation, such as RAG, memory architectures, tool-integrated reasoning, and multi-agent coordination mechanisms.
One important aspect of context processing is contextual self-refinement, which aims to improve outputs through cyclical feedback mechanisms.
An important aspect of context management is how to deal efficiently with long context and reasoning chains. The paper provides an overview of and characteristics of key methods for long-chain reasoning.
Memory is key to building complex agentic systems that can adapt, learn, and perform coherent long-term tasks.
There is also a nice overview of different memory implementation patterns.
Tool-calling capabilities in an area of continuous development in the space. The paper provides an overview of tool-augmented language model architectures and how they compare across tool categories.
Context engineering is going to evolve rapidly.
But this is a great overview to better map and keep track of this rapidly evolving landscape.
There is a lot more in the paper. Over 1000+ references included.
This survey tries to capture the most common methods and biggest trends, but there is more on the horizon as models continue to improve in capability and new agent architectures emerge.
> GPT-4.1 leads
> Gemini-2.5-flash excels at tool selection
> Kimi K2 is the top open-source model
> Grok 4 falls short
> Reasoning models lag behind
> No single model dominates all domains
More below:
@rungalileo introduces Agent Leaderboard v2, a domain-specific evaluation benchmark for AI agents designed to simulate real enterprise tasks across banking, healthcare, insurance, telecom, and investment.
Unlike earlier tool-calling benchmarks that saturate at 90%+ accuracy, v2 focuses on Action Completion (AC) and Tool Selection Quality (TSQ) in complex, multi-turn conversations.
Semantically empty tokens, like “Thought process:”, “Solution”, or even just a colon “:”, can consistently trick models into giving false positive rewards.
Here are my notes:
Overview
Investigates the surprising fragility of LLM-based reward models used in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR).
The authors find that inserting superficial, semantically empty tokens, like “Thought process:”, “Solution”, or even just a colon “:”, can consistently trick models into giving false positive rewards, regardless of the actual correctness of the response.
"Master keys" break LLM judges
Simple, generic lead-ins (e.g., “Let’s solve this step by step”) and even punctuation marks can elicit false YES judgments from top reward models.
This manipulation works across models (GPT-4o, Claude-4, Qwen2.5, etc.), tasks (math and general reasoning), and prompt formats, reaching up to 90% false positive rates in some cases.
MemAgent-14B is trained on 32K-length documents with an 8K context window.
Achieves >76% accuracy even at 3.5M tokens!
That consistency is crazy!
Here are my notes:
Overview
Introduces an RL–driven memory agent that enables transformer-based LLMs to handle documents up to 3.5 million tokens with near lossless performance, linear complexity, and no architectural modifications.
RL-shaped fixed-length memory
MemAgent reads documents in segments and maintains a fixed-size memory updated via an overwrite mechanism.
This lets it process arbitrarily long inputs with O(N) inference cost while avoiding context window overflows.
This is a really good example of integrating agentic reasoning into RAG.
Leads to better personalization and improved recommendations.
Here are my notes:
Overview
This work introduces a multi-agent framework, ARAG, that enhances traditional RAG systems with reasoning agents tailored to user modeling and contextual ranking.
It reframes recommendation as a structured coordination problem between LLM agents.
Instead of relying on static similarity-based retrieval, ARAG comprises four agents:
- User Understanding Agent synthesizes user preferences from long-term and session behavior.
- NLI Agent evaluates semantic alignment between candidate items and user intent.
AI for Science is where I spend most of my time exploring with AI agents.
This 120+ pages report does a good job of highlighting why all the big names like OpenAI and Google DeepMind are pursuing AI4Science.
Bookmark it!
My notes below:
There are five key areas:
(1) AI for Scientific Comprehension (2) AI for Academic Survey (3) AI for Scientific Discovery (4) AI for Academic Writing (5) AI for Academic Peer Review
Just look at the large body of work that's been happening in the space: