Pre-simulated skill libraries beat live code generation 44.7% to 28.7% -- at zero runtime cost
Notes on Skill Discovery for Software Scripting Automation via Offline Simulations with LLMs (arXiv:2504.20406) — Paiheng Xu, Gang Wu, Xiang Chen, Tong Yu, Chang Xiao, Franck Dernoncourt, Tianyi Zhou, Wei Ai, Viswanathan Swaminathan · April 2025 · Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics
Note published · written by SkillFed’s research pipeline from the paper above · how these notes are made
AI-assisted notes · reviewed by SkillFed Skill evolutionThis framework skips runtime code generation entirely: it pre-builds and validates a library of Adobe Illustrator scripts offline, then serves them by lookup instead of writing ExtendScript on the fly. Task ideas come from two directions. A top-down pass walks documented software functionality -- drawing, arranging objects, and so on. A bottom-up pass mines an API synergy graph -- built from which Illustrator APIs actually co-occur in working scripts -- using GNN link-prediction to propose tasks for API pairs the system has never seen paired before. Each candidate then runs through skill generation with trials: an LLM writes a script, an LVLM validator checks both the execution output and the resulting canvas state, and the LLM gets up to three offline attempts to fix what broke -- all before any end user asks for it.
On a 94-task held-out set, plain retrieval against the pre-built skillset succeeds 44.7% of the time, in 0.1 seconds, for zero runtime tokens. Live gpt-4o code generation manages 28.7% success at 4.0 seconds and 666 tokens. A retrieval-augmented generation variant -- stuffing retrieved skills into the prompt rather than running them directly -- lands in between at 42.6% success, 4.3 seconds, 1219 tokens. The synergy-graph approach earns its complexity: Hit@5 for predicting which APIs pair well reaches 37.3%, more than double the 16.7% a plain semantic-similarity baseline gets, and bottom-up exploration built from it touches 151 distinct APIs versus 49 for top-down and 48 in Illustrator's own sample scripts. None of this comes free on the first try -- a single generation pass succeeds only 16.7% (top-down) to 23.1% (bottom-up) of the time, roughly doubling to 34.9% and 46.6% by the third offline trial.
Key numbers
| Retrieval-only success rate vs. live gpt-4o generation | 44.7% vs 28.7% |
| Response time / runtime tokens: retrieval vs. live generation | 0.1s, 0 tokens vs 4.0s, 666 tokens |
| Single-attempt script success rate before offline refinement | 16.7%-23.1% |
| Distinct APIs covered: bottom-up vs top-down vs native samples | 151 vs 49 vs 48 |
| GNN link-prediction Hit@5 vs semantic-similarity baseline | 37.3% vs 16.7% |
Skills related to this research
Related research
Related notes
- 29 mined skills beat prompt-search code optimizers by up to 12.5 points — without running the code →
- Best skill-generation pipeline clears just 14% of code-repo tasks, 25% of document tasks →
- 40,285 Skills Later, Supply Still Doesn't Match Demand →
- Decomposing agent traces into workflow, semantics, and attachments beats prompted summaries by 10.5% →
- Compiling a skill per task beats a static library by up to 13 Pass@1 points →
- Cut Skill Bodies 39%, Task Success Rises 2.8% →
- A three-tier skill hierarchy — not a bigger skill library — drives a 79.6% jump on long-horizon GUI tasks →
- One Approval, Zero Further Checks →
- Reward reuse, not just creation: +8.9 points scenario completion, -59% tokens →
References
- Xu, P., Wu, G., Chen, X., Yu, T., Xiao, C., Dernoncourt, F., Zhou, T., Ai, W., & Swaminathan, V. (2025). Skill Discovery for Software Scripting Automation via Offline Simulations with LLMs. arXiv:2504.20406.
- Kipf, T. N., & Welling, M. (2017). Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networks. ICLR.
- Wang, G., Xie, Y., Jiang, Y., Mandlekar, A., Xiao, C., Zhu, Y., Fan, L., & Anandkumar, A. (2023). Voyager: An Open-Ended Embodied Agent with Large Language Models. arXiv:2305.16291.
- Wang, B., Fang, H., Eisner, J., Van Durme, B., & Su, Y. (2024). LLMs in the Imaginarium: Tool Learning through Simulated Trial and Error. ACL. arXiv:2403.04746.