Code snippet adaptation is a fundamental activity in the software development process. Unlike code generation, code snippet adaptation is not a "free creation", which requires developers to tailor a given code snippet in order to fit specific requirements and the code context. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have confirmed their effectiveness in the code generation task with promising results. However, their performance on adaptation, a reuse-oriented and context-dependent code change prediction task, is still unclear. To bridge this gap, we conduct an empirical study to investigate the performance and issues of LLMs on the adaptation task. We first evaluate the adaptation performances of three popular LLMs and compare them to the code generation task. Our result indicates that their adaptation ability is weaker than generation, with a nearly 15% decrease on pass@1 and more context-related errors. By manually inspecting 200 cases, we further investigate the causes of LLMs' sub-optimal performance, which can be classified into three categories, i.e., Unclear Requirement, Requirement Misalignment and Context Misapplication. Based on the above empirical research, we propose an interactive prompting approach to eliciting LLMs' adaptation ability. Experimental result reveals that our approach greatly improve LLMs' adaptation performance. The best-performing Human-LLM interaction successfully solves 159 out of the 202 identified defects and improves the pass@1 and pass@5 by over 40% compared to the initial instruction-based prompt. Considering human efforts, we suggest multi-agent interaction as a trade-off, which can achieve comparable performance with excellent generalization ability. We deem that our approach could provide methodological assistance for autonomous code snippet reuse and adaptation with LLMs.