arXiv:2607.09678v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When LLM agents hand off information to one another, does the message format matter? Two literatures disagree: format-optimization work reports that structured messages cut cost without hurting accuracy, while format-restriction work finds that imposing structure degrades generation -- and neither measures what happens when a message traverses multiple hops, where copy fidelity, not one-shot generation, dominates. We introduce a controlled relay testbed: briefs of twelve programmatically generated atomic facts are re-encoded hop-by-hop in five formats (free NL, precision-instructed NL, JSON, triples, key-value) over six hops, scored by a fixed strong grader against programmatic ground truth, across two relay-capability tiers, a cognitive-load condition, and a paired-fork error injection. We find that message-format effects are tier-dependent. (i) Under faithful-relay instructions a strong relay is nearly lossless -- the documented "telephone-game" collapse does not occur -- and adding per-hop cognitive load leaves format-level fidelity unchanged (within +/-1.8 points) while raising generation cost by 24-53%. (ii) Under a weak (1.5B) relay the across-format spread of six-hop recall grows by a factor of 8.7 (from 2.3 to 20.5 points), driven by two opposing mechanisms -- an encoding toll paid by the rigid formats and drift resistance specific to the fixed-key JSON schema -- that flip the format ranking in transit. (iii) In a paired-fork injection, an injected wrong value, once present, persists to the final hop in 83-100% of chains in every format, closely matching each format's retention of the true value, with no detectable collateral damage to neighboring facts. Structure buys a faithful, error-localizing channel -- not an error-correcting code -- and format choice should follow the weakest relay in the pipeline.
Memory-Conditioned Tool Calling for Camera-First Visual Agents