Instruction following refers to the ability of large language models (LLMs) to generate outputs that satisfy all specified constraints. Existing research has primarily focused on constraint categories, offering limited evaluation dimensions and little guidance for improving instruction-following abilities. To address this gap, we introduce MulDimIF, a multi-dimensional constraint framework encompassing three constraint patterns, four constraint categories, and four difficulty levels. Based on this framework, we design a controllable instruction generation pipeline. Through constraint expansion, conflict detection, and instruction rewriting, we construct 9,106 code-verifiable samples. We evaluate 18 LLMs from six model families and find marked performance differences across constraint settings. For instance, average accuracy decreases from 80.82% at Level I to 36.76% at Level IV. Moreover, training with data generated by our framework significantly improves instruction following without compromising general performance. In-depth analysis indicates that these gains stem largely from parameter updates in attention modules, which strengthen constraint recognition and adherence. Code and data are available in https://github.com/Junjie-Ye/MulDimIF.

Solving problems through tool use under explicit constraints constitutes a highly challenging yet unavoidable scenario for large language models (LLMs), requiring capabilities such as function calling, instruction following, and self-refinement. However, progress has been hindered by the absence of dedicated evaluations. To address this, we introduce CCTU, a benchmark for evaluating LLM tool use under complex constraints. CCTU is grounded in a taxonomy of 12 constraint categories spanning four dimensions (i.e., resource, behavior, toolset, and response). The benchmark comprises 200 carefully curated and challenging test cases across diverse tool-use scenarios, each involving an average of seven constraint types and an average prompt length exceeding 4,700 tokens. To enable reliable evaluation, we develop an executable constraint validation module that performs step-level validation and enforces compliance during multi-turn interactions between models and their environments. We evaluate nine state-of-the-art LLMs in both thinking and non-thinking modes. Results indicate that when strict adherence to all constraints is required, no model achieves a task completion rate above 20%. Further analysis reveals that models violate constraints in over 50% of cases, particularly in the resource and response dimensions. Moreover, LLMs demonstrate limited capacity for self-refinement even after receiving detailed feedback on constraint violations, highlighting a critical bottleneck in the development of robust tool-use agents. To facilitate future research, we release the data and code.