Beyond State Machines: Executing Network Procedures with Agentic Tool-Calling Sequences

AI-generated keywords: Agentic AI Large Language Model (LLM) Mobile Communication Systems Network Procedures Procedure Execution

AI-generated Key Points

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

  • Study on utilization of Agentic AI in designing future mobile communication systems
  • Investigation of four different approaches for agent execution and procedure distribution
  • Evaluation using User Equipment (UE) IP allocation procedure as a case study
  • Results showed latency and execution correctness differences among the approaches
  • Stress test revealed limitations in sequential procedural steps for LLM agents
  • Models with advanced tool-calling capabilities demonstrated reliable execution over longer procedures
  • Introduction of a procedure-specific error taxonomy to analyze failures in multi-step procedural execution
  • Potential of Agentic AI in revolutionizing mobile communication systems by providing flexible services, automating complex network operations, and enabling autonomous decision-making
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Purna Sai Garigipati, Onur Ayan, Kishor Chandra Joshi, Xueli An

Abstract: Agentic AI will be an essential enabling technology for designing future mobile communication systems, which could provide flexible and customized services, automate complex network operations, and drive autonomous decision-making across the network. This work studies how Large Language Model (LLM)-based network AI agents can be utilized to execute network procedures expressed as sequences of tool invocations. We investigate four approaches, which differ in how the agent obtains the procedure and in how execution is distributed between the agent and the underlying tools. We evaluated the latency and execution correctness across these approaches using a User Equipment (UE) IP allocation procedure as a case study. Furthermore, we conduct a stress test to examine how many sequential procedural steps an LLM agent can reliably execute before failure. Our results show that approaches relying on iterative agent-side reasoning incur higher latency and are more prone to execution errors, while approaches where the procedure is encapsulated within a single tool, which internally orchestrates the required steps by invoking other tools, reduce latency by limiting repeated reasoning. The stress-test results further show that the model with advanced tool-calling capability maintains reliable execution over longer procedures than the other evaluated models; however, all models exhibit reliability degradation as procedure length increases, revealing clear execution limits in multi-step tool-based workflows. To systematically analyze failures in procedure execution, we introduce a procedure-specific error taxonomy that categorizes deviations in multi-step procedural execution.

Submitted to arXiv on 04 May. 2026

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2605.02584v1

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

The study conducted by Purna Sai Garigipati, Onur Ayan, Kishor Chandra Joshi, and Xueli An delves into the utilization of Agentic AI in designing future mobile communication systems. The research focuses on how -based network AI agents can execute network procedures through sequences of tool invocations. Four different approaches were investigated to understand how the agent acquires the procedure and distributes execution between itself and underlying tools. Through an evaluation using a User Equipment (UE) IP allocation procedure as a case study, the researchers analyzed latency and execution correctness across the four approaches. A stress test was also conducted to determine the number of sequential procedural steps an LLM agent can reliably execute before failure. The results indicated that approaches relying on iterative agent-side reasoning experienced higher latency and were more susceptible to execution errors. On the other hand, approaches where the procedure was encapsulated within a single tool showed reduced latency by limiting repeated reasoning. Furthermore, the stress-test results revealed that models with advanced tool-calling capabilities maintained reliable execution over longer procedures compared to other evaluated models. However, all models exhibited reliability degradation as procedure length increased, highlighting clear execution limits in multi-step tool-based workflows. To systematically analyze failures in procedure execution, a procedure-specific error taxonomy was introduced to categorize deviations in multi-step procedural execution. In conclusion, this research sheds light on the potential of in revolutionizing mobile communication systems by providing flexible services, automating complex network operations, and enabling autonomous decision-making. The findings offer valuable insights into optimizing network procedures through and highlight key considerations for enhancing efficiency and reliability in future mobile communication technologies.
Created on 19 May. 2026

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.