Productivity & Collaboration research-curationpaper-listliterature-reviewmulti-agent-systemsagent-benchmarkstool-uselanguage-model-planning

LLM Agents Papers

A topic-organized reading list for research on large language model agents.

FollowAgents review · FARS-2.1
Insufficient evidence
Evidence confidence: Low Reviewed Sep 17, 2026 Reviewed revision dfdaf8e17bcc
Safety controls not found in source: least-privilege scoping, confirmation before acting, data-flow disclosure, sensitive-data handling, dependency security, disclosed external effects, rollback or recovery path, verifiable attribution
Before you use it
  • On the supplied evidence, this repository is a bibliography rather than an installable or executable Agent product or framework; this assessment must not be treated as a safety or quality review of the listed papers or systems.
  • The MIT badge alone does not establish the applicable license terms; reuse and redistribution rights should remain unconfirmed until the license text is available.
  • Paper links, authors, dates, and classifications are recorded only from the supplied static text and were not executed, externally checked, or independently verified.
Review evidence [1]
See the full review method →

What does this agent do, and when should you use it?

LLM Agents Papers is a curated index of research papers and resources rather than an installable or executable agent. It organizes the literature into overviews, individual agents, multiple agents, applications, frameworks, and other topics. The individual-agent section further covers personality, memory, planning, tool use, and reinforcement-learning training, while the multi-agent section distinguishes collaborative, adversarial, and open-ended interactions. Its resources include benchmarks such as Mind2Web, AgentBench, TravelPlanner, OSWorld, and AppWorld. Entries generally provide titles, authors, dates, and paper links, with code links for some projects; the repository's delivery boundary is a static research catalog, not a model runtime, API, CLI, or hosted service.

The repository maintains a manually organized directory in its README. Readers navigate from Content into Overview, Agent, Multiple Agents, Application, Framework, Others, and Resources, then browse subtopics such as Personality, Memory, Planning, Tool use, RL training, Collaborative Exchanges, Adversarial Interactions, Casual/Open Conversations, and Benchmarks. Individual records link to an abstract page or PDF and identify the paper's authors and date; selected records also include a code link. The repository does not itself search papers, invoke models, plan actions, run evaluations, process datasets, or expose documented APIs, classes, commands, or generated outputs.

  1. A researcher entering the LLM-agent field can build a reading path through surveys, memory, planning, and tool-use sections.
  2. A student developing a multi-agent research topic can separately survey collaborative communication, debate-style interaction, and social simulation.
  3. An engineer selecting evaluation material can locate benchmarks such as AgentBench, OSWorld, TravelPlanner, and AppWorld.
  4. An author preparing a literature review can use the categorized titles, author lists, dates, and links to assemble a candidate bibliography.
  5. A team surveying agent applications or frameworks can browse the dedicated sections and follow the code links included with selected papers.

What are this agent's strengths and limitations?

Pros
  • The taxonomy spans personality, memory, planning, tool use, reinforcement-learning training, and several forms of multi-agent interaction.
  • Entries commonly combine a title, author list, paper link, and date, making it practical to identify and inspect primary papers.
  • Applications, frameworks, and benchmarks receive dedicated sections, and selected papers include links to code.
  • The supplied list ranges from early foundational work to entries dated 2026, giving readers a view across multiple stages of the field.
Limitations
  • This is a static reading list, not an operational agent; it provides no search API, CLI, model invocation, or automated workflow.
  • The source does not document selection criteria, a systematic search method, peer-review verification, or completeness guarantees.
  • The README contains duplicate numbering, skipped numbers, and inconsistent date formatting, so citations require manual verification.
  • Repository metadata reports the license as unknown while the README displays an MIT badge; the supplied source does not include the license text needed to resolve that discrepancy.
  • There is no documented installation, export, citation-management, or integration path for ChatGPT, Codex, Claude, or their APIs.

How do you install or deploy this agent?

No installation is documented or required for the material shown. The source describes a GitHub-hosted paper list and provides no package, dependency manifest, build command, container image, service endpoint, or runtime requirement. The repository could ordinarily be cloned for offline access, but the supplied material does not document or verify a specific command as a product installation procedure.

How do you use this agent?

Open the repository URL, use the README Content index to select a research area, and follow each abs, paper, or code link to the underlying work. No credentials, configuration file, or startup command are documented for initial use. Automated search, filtering, export, citation management, and synchronization interfaces are not described; adopters needing those functions would have to build an integration or curate the records manually.

How does this agent compare with similar options?

The repository explicitly points to two adjacent lists from the same organization: Prompt4ReasoningPapers focuses on reasoning through language-model prompting, while KnowledgeEditingPapers focuses on knowledge editing for large language models. LLM Agents Papers instead centers on agent capabilities, multi-agent interaction, applications, frameworks, and evaluation resources.

FAQ

Is this a runnable LLM agent?
No. The supplied material shows a paper and resource index, with no agent implementation, model entry point, API, CLI, or deployment instructions.
Does using the list require a paid API or model credentials?
No credentials or paid services are documented for browsing the list itself. The source does not establish whether externally linked papers, codebases, or their dependencies have separate costs.
Can it be connected directly to ChatGPT, Codex, Claude, or a model API?
No native integration or provider adapter for those platforms is documented. Such use would require a separately developed integration.
Can it serve as the sole source for a systematic literature review?
It should not be assumed to do so. Although it contains many categorized records, the source provides no systematic retrieval protocol, inclusion and exclusion criteria, or completeness guarantee.
What license applies?
The supplied repository metadata says unknown, while the README displays an MIT license badge. Because the actual license file is not included in the source, adopters should verify it before redistribution or reuse.

Related agents