200k+ skills wired into one graph, +40% reward across three backbones
Notes on SkillNet: Create, Evaluate, and Connect AI Skills (arXiv:2603.04448) — Yuanying Liang, R. Zhong, Haoming Xu, Chen Jiang, Yi Zhong, Runnan Fang, Jiasheng Gu, Shumin Deng, Yu-Zhe Yao, Mengru Wang, Shuofei Qiao, Xin Xu, and 37 more · February 2026
Note published · written by SkillFed’s research pipeline from the paper above · how these notes are made
AI-assisted notes · reviewed by SkillFed Skill retrieval Bridge: retrieval × benchmarksA nineteen-institution team spanning Zhejiang University, Alibaba, Tencent, Ant Group, and UCLA built SkillNet, infrastructure that creates, grades, and connects agent skills at scale instead of just hosting them. Skills get pulled from execution trajectories, GitHub repositories, PDFs and slide decks, and raw natural-language prompts through an LLM-driven pipeline, then run through deduplication (directory-structure and MD5 comparison) plus rule-based and model-based filtering before landing in one of ten functional categories. The distinguishing piece is a three-layer skill ontology: a taxonomy of categories and tags, a relation graph linking individual skills via similar_to, compose_with, belong_to, and depend_on edges, and a package library for modular deployment. Skills here aren't vetted one at a time and left to sit — they're wired into a queryable network.
Every admitted skill is graded on five axes — Safety, Completeness, Executability, Maintainability, Cost-awareness — by an LLM evaluator (GPT-5o-mini) on a Good/Average/Poor scale, with Executability getting a second check: code-bearing skills actually run in sandboxes. Against a 200-skill sample independently rated by three PhD-level annotators, the automated scores stayed under a mean absolute error of 0.03 on every dimension, with quadratic weighted kappa essentially at 1.000. Then came the real test: across ALFWorld, WebShop, and ScienceWorld, three backbone models — DeepSeek V3.2, Gemini 2.5 Pro, o4 Mini — equipped with SkillNet-derived skill collections beat both a ReAct baseline and an ExpeL-style experience-retrieval baseline, on seen and unseen task splits alike, with zero overlap between the skill-source trajectories and the test tasks.
Key numbers
| Average reward gain over ReAct | +40% |
| Reduction in interaction steps | -30% |
| Total candidate skills aggregated | 200,000+ |
| Curated high-quality skills retained | 150,000+ |
| Evaluator MAE vs. human raters (200-skill sample) | <0.03 |
Skills related to this research
Related notes
- A skill library built by GLM-4.6 boosts GPT-4.1's task success by 10 points →
- Same skill, +22 points for Claude Sonnet, +5.5 for Nemotron Nano →
- 215 Skills, 165 Contributors, No Fidelity Test →
- 216,938 skills, and only 114,565 come with a paper trail →
- Self-written APIs make web agents 32-40% better — weaker models gain even more from them →
- 478 GUI skills push GPT-5's desktop success rate up 15.6 points →
- Letting computer-use agents explore GUIs first turns near-zero success into 25–37% →
- GitHub-mined skills teach 40% better, but 26% ship vulnerabilities →
- Splitting agent memory into skills and experience gains up to 11 points of task success →
References
- SkillNet: Create, Evaluate, and Connect AI Skills (arXiv:2603.04448)
- Reflexion: language agents with verbal reinforcement learning (Shinn et al., NeurIPS 2023)
- ExpeL: LLM Agents Are Experiential Learners (Zhao et al., AAAI 2024)
- ALFWorld / WebShop / ScienceWorld benchmarks